Waste Supporting Paper
This is a HTML friendly version of the waste supporting paper
Leeds Local Plan
Waste Supporting Paper
Executive Summary
This Outline Waste Needs Assessment (WNA) provides a high-level evidence base
on current and future waste management needs in Leeds up to 2042. It will inform
the new Leeds Local Plan (Regulation 18 draft) by identifying how much waste is
generated, what capacity exists to manage it, and where there are shortfalls or
surpluses in capacity now and at the end of the new Plan period.
The WNA covers all major controlled waste streams in Leeds, including Local
Authority Collected Waste (household and similar waste) (LACW), Commercial and
Industrial (C&I) waste, Construction, Demolition and Excavation (CDE) waste,
Hazardous waste, and Agricultural waste, and assesses requirements against
existing waste infrastructure. Other waste types such as wastewater sludge and lowlevel
radioactive waste are outside the scope of this assessment. This assessment
has been prepared using the West Yorkshire Combined Authority (WYCA) Waste
Capacity Model as the primary data source, alongside local knowledge, but it does
not constitute a detailed investigation using other datasets such as the Environment
Agency Waste Data Interrogator (WDI). Key terms used are defined in Appendix 6.
The findings presented should be seen as a starting point for dialogue, providing a
broad understanding of indicative capacity gaps and surpluses, and forming the
basis for public consultation. Comment and feedback from the waste management
industry, neighbouring authorities, and other stakeholders on the suggested
approaches and assumptions is especially welcomed to help refine the evidence
base and ensure that ultimately local waste planning policy is robust, deliverable,
and aligned with national and other local policy and strategies.
It is estimated that approximately 2.3 million tonnes of solid waste was produced in
Leeds in 2023. The largest proportions arise from construction, demolition and
excavation activities (c43% of the total) and from commercial and industrial (C&I)
sources (c40%). Local Authority Collected Waste (mainly household) waste makes
up around 14% of the total, with hazardous and agricultural wastes forming a small
remainder (c3% and <1% respectively).
Different growth and waste management scenarios have been developed as part of
this WNA. Under the scenarios modelled, projections indicate only modest growth in
overall waste arisings by 2042. Under a Median Growth scenario, total waste in 2042
is forecast at c2.4 Mt, while a Maximum Growth scenario yields c2.53 Mt (about 5%
higher). Figure 1 illustrates the projected 2042 arisings by waste stream under these
two scenarios. Notably, the difference between scenarios is most pronounced for
Construction/Demolition and Excavation wastes (reflecting higher assumed growth in
the maximum scenario), whereas household and hazardous wastes show very little
variation between scenarios.
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 4 of 60
Figure 1: Projected waste arisings by 2042 under two scenarios (Median vs Maximum
growth).
Despite anticipated policy measures to reduce waste and increase recycling, it is
expected that Leeds will remain a major producer of waste within the region due to
its large population and it being an economic hub. The Plan area is broadly well
served with waste management capacity for recycling and energy recovery, but it is
estimated that there are significant capacity gaps in key areas as outlined below.
Recycling
There is extensive recycling capacity in Leeds (estimated at c2.7 million tonnes per
annum across all waste streams – see Table 1), which exceeds the forecast
quantities of waste needing recycling in 2042. In other words, there is an overall
surplus of recycling capacity in Leeds, particularly for LACW, C&I and C&D wastes.
This suggests net self-sufficiency in recycling these waste streams can be achieved
in Leeds, and is likely importing waste from outside to make full use of its recycling
facilities. However, one exception is organic (food/garden) waste treatment as there
is currently there is no significant composting or anaerobic digestion capacity within
Leeds, meaning any large-scale roll-out of separate food waste collections will rely
on facilities outside the Plan area or development of new capacity. Composting
capacity is identified as an area to keep under review (current arrangements for
garden waste involve contracts with external processors).
Other Recovery – Energy from Waste (EfW)
Leeds benefits from a major Energy from Waste facility (the Recycling and Energy
Recovery Facility (RERF) at Cross Green) with c200,000 tpa capacity dedicated to
LACW, plus additional commercial residual waste treatment capacity (e.g. production
of refuse-derived fuel and access to regional EfW facilities) amounting to c0.54 Mt.
2,900
988,016
272,500
706,100
83,393
346,586
3,285
1,030,731
295,894
766,720
86,999
348,560
AGR C&I CD E HAZ LACW
PROJECTED WASTE ARISINGS BY
2042 UNDER TWO SCENARIOS
Med Growth Max Growth
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 5 of 60
Capacity for residual waste treatment exceeds requirements for waste produced in
Leeds, resulting in a surplus. By 2042, with increased recycling, the Leeds RERF is
expected to have spare capacity, e.g. under median growth, residual LACW falls to
c118,000 tpa by 2042, well below the plant’s capacity. Both scenarios indicate a
surplus in energy recovery capacity for non-hazardous waste. This provides
resilience and opportunities to import residual waste from neighbouring areas.
Landfill (Disposal)
There is no non-hazardous landfill and no hazardous waste landfill capacity in
Leeds. Currently 100% of non-inert waste landfill needs in Leeds are met by
exporting waste to sites outside the Plan area. This represents a critical capacity gap
in achieving self-sufficiency for final disposal. However, it aligns with national policy
to reduce reliance on landfill – by 2035 no more than 10% of municipal waste should
be landfilled. Inert excavation waste disposal capacity is also insufficient: while there
are two inert landfill/recovery sites (at Britannia Quarry and Blackhill Quarry) in
Leeds accepting excavation and rubble, their combined remaining void is roughly 0.9
million tonnes, which is far below the forecast cumulative excavation waste that will
need management through to 2042. Even assuming most excavation waste can be
beneficially reused (e.g. in restoration or construction projects), there is a projected
shortfall of suitable void space in the order of several million tonnes. In summary,
there is a major shortfall in disposal capacity and so Leeds will remain dependent on
regional landfill and other deposit to land sites for the foreseeable future, especially
for residues that cannot be recycled or burned (e.g. asbestos, certain hazardous or
inert wastes).
Hazardous Waste Treatment
There are several permitted hazardous waste treatment facilities in Leeds which
handle wastes such as oils and chemicals, as well as some vehicle depollution
activity with a combined capacity of c30,000tpa. This covers only a portion of the
c80,000+ tonnes of hazardous waste arising in Leeds each year. By 2042,
hazardous arisings are projected to be c83,000 tpa (assuming modest growth). A
capacity gap for hazardous waste treatment is forecast in the region of 50,000 tpa –
meaning much of the hazardous waste arising in Leeds must continue to be handled
by specialist facilities elsewhere. No hazardous landfill capacity exists in Leeds, so
hazardous landfill requirements (e.g. for asbestos) are 100% met by exporting to
regional sites. This situation is common for most Waste Planning Authorities given
the high cost and specialist nature of hazardous waste infrastructure.
There is also an apparent surplus in hazardous waste transfer capacity (transfer
stations for sorting/aggregating hazardous wastes) relative to the hazardous waste
arising in Leeds.
The following summarises recommendations to address the above findings:
Plan for Capacity Gaps
The Local Plan should recognise the shortfall in local landfill and inert waste disposal
capacity and reflect the availability of capacity and plan for provision where it is
considered necessary. While new non-hazardous landfill in Leeds is unlikely (and
inconsistent with waste reduction targets), the plan can support alternative strategies
for residual waste, e.g. maximising diversion from landfill and working with
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 6 of 60
neighbouring authorities to ensure continued access to regional landfill capacity. For
inert excavation waste, the Council should consider allocating additional capacity
(e.g. extensions to existing inert landfill or identifying new sites for land reclamation
with excavated waste) to help close the gap for construction spoil management,
provided environmental safeguards are met.
Safeguard and Optimise Existing Capacity
Existing recycling and other recovery facilities in Leeds are critical assets that enable
net self-sufficiency in those areas. The Local Plan should include policies to
safeguard existing waste management sites from incompatible development or
closure. It should also support the full use of available capacity – for example,
encouraging commercial waste to be directed to local facilities (reducing exports)
and potentially allowing Leeds facilities to handle a share of other areas’ waste
where capacity surpluses exist, in line with the proximity principle.
Encourage New Capacity Where Needed
Where clear gaps are identified – notably for organic waste treatment (food/green
waste) and hazardous waste management – the Plan should support the
development of appropriate new facilities. For example, national policy requires
separate food waste collections and so local or regional anaerobic digestion or invessel
composting capacity will be needed. The Plan can include criteria-based
policies to facilitate such facilities in suitable locations (e.g. on industrial land), which
might offer regionally significant capacity. Similarly, if opportunities arise for
hazardous waste treatment capacity (or high-tech recycling of specific hazardous
waste streams), supportive policy within the Plan would help make such proposals
acceptable within Leeds, though it should be recognised that many hazardous
wastes will continue to be managed at a regional (not local) level due to economies
of scale.
Regional Cooperation
The Council should continue to engage with neighbouring authorities and regional
waste fora to address cross-boundary waste needs. A Duty to Cooperate approach
is vital, given the reliance on facilities beyond the Plan area boundary for certain
waste types arising in Leeds (and vice versa). A Statement of Common Ground on
waste planning within West Yorkshire (and potentially with areas receiving waste
requiring landfill waste from Leeds) is recommended to ensure that sufficient
capacity is available and mutually agreed upon throughout the plan period. This
includes cooperating on the provision of landfill, hazardous waste facilities, and
sharing surplus capacity such as energy-from- waste plants.
Policy Alignment with National Targets
Planning policies should be aligned with the circular economy and waste reduction
targets set by government. For example, policies should reflect the drive to recycle
65% of municipal waste by 2035 and to reduce landfilling to under 10%, as well as
the longer-term target to halve residual waste to 287 kg per person by 2042. Local
targets or monitoring indicators can mirror these. For example the Plan can require
space for separate storage of recyclables in new development and promote on-site
waste reduction in construction, and re-use of demolition materials.
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 7 of 60
Monitoring and Flexibility
Given the uncertainties in waste forecasting, the WNA should be treated as a living
document. The Council should monitor waste arisings and capacity on an ongoing
basis (through annual monitoring reports and updates to the waste data interrogator
returns). If assumptions change, for example, if waste growth accelerates beyond
the ‘maximum’ scenario or if significant capacity is lost, the Council should be
prepared to update the needs assessment and adjust its plans. Flexibility can be
built into Local Plan policies to allow a rapid response to any significant changes in
waste management technology, legislation (e.g. new Extended Producer
Responsibility impacts) or infrastructure capacity. This adaptive approach will ensure
adequate waste management provision can be maintained in Leeds up to 2042 and
beyond.
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 8 of 60
1. Introduction
Purpose and Scope
1.1 This report presents an Outline Waste Needs Assessment for Leeds City
Council, forming part of the evidence base for the new Leeds Local Plan (to 2042).
The purpose is to estimate current and future waste arisings in Leeds and to
compare these with existing waste management capacity, in order to identify any
capacity gaps or surpluses over the plan period. The assessment will inform local
plan policies on waste, including decisions on safeguarding existing facilities and the
need (if any) for additional waste infrastructure or site allocations. For definitions of
technical terms used within this report please see Appendix 6.
1.2 The WNA addresses all key solid waste streams for which the Council has
planning responsibilities, specifically:
• Local Authority Collected Waste (LACW): waste collected by or on behalf of
the Council, principally household waste.
• Commercial and Industrial (C&I) Waste: wastes generated by businesses,
offices, shops, factories and other industrial or commercial activities managed
by private sector arrangements.
• Construction, Demolition and Excavation (CD&E) Waste: materials from
building sites, civil engineering projects, roadworks etc. This includes rubble,
concrete, soil, stones and similar wastes arising from the construction and
demolition process. C&D waste (hard construction/demolition materials) is
sometimes distinguished from Excavation waste (mainly soils) where relevant,
as their management can differ.
• Hazardous Waste: wastes that are harmful to human health or the
environment (e.g. certain chemicals, asbestos, contaminated soils, oils, some
electrical waste). These require specialist treatment or disposal.
• Agricultural Waste: waste from farming and horticultural activities. Typically
this is a very small waste stream in an urban authority like Leeds, and much
of it is managed on-site (e.g. manure spreading) rather than entering the
waste management system.
1.3 Other waste streams including wastewater, sewage sludge, and low-level
radioactive wastes are excluded from this assessment.
1.4 This WNA includes estimates of current waste arisings (tonnages by waste
stream), forecasts of how those might change by 2042 under different scenarios, an
estimate of existing waste management capacity in Leeds (with capacities), and an
evaluation of whether there is enough capacity to manage an equivalent amount of
waste arising in Leeds within the Plan area (‘net self-sufficiency’) and whether there
will be a need to rely on capacity elsewhere.
Planning Context
National Policy
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 9 of 60
1.5 This WNA has been undertaken in accordance with national waste planning
policy and guidance. The National Planning Policy for Waste (NPPW, 2014) requires
Waste Planning Authorities to plan for sustainable waste management, including
identifying needs for facilities. The NPPW also highlights the need for planning
policies to support the delivery of waste infrastructure in line with the waste
hierarchy. Detailed guidance is provided in Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) on
how to assess waste needs, aiming for communities to take responsibility for their
own waste (proximity principle).
1.6 Key national strategies influencing this WNA include the Government’s Our
Waste, Our Resources: Strategy for England (2018) and subsequent policy updates.
These set ambitious targets in line with the EU Circular Economy Package, now
embedded in UK law. Notably, by 2035 at least 65% of municipal waste by weight
should be recycled, and no more than 10% of municipal waste should be landfilled.
There is also a commitment to ‘near elimination’ of biodegradable waste to landfill by
2028 – effectively phasing out landfilling of food, paper, and other putrescible wastes
to cut greenhouse gas emissions. More recently, the Environment Act 2021 led to a
statutory target to halve residual waste (excluding major mineral wastes) per capita
by 2042, which translates to a target of no more than 287 kg of residual waste per
person in 2042 (from a baseline of 574 kg in 2019). These targets underpin the drive
for greater recycling, composting and other recovery capacity, and imply a
diminishing role for landfill other forms of recovery such as EfW.
1.8 Several upcoming national policies will impact waste arisings and management
in Leeds as outlined below.
Consistency in Collections and Food Waste
1.9 From 2026, all English local authorities must provide separate weekly food waste
collections to households. This will significantly divert biodegradable waste from
residual waste streams into composting/anaerobic digestion (AD) treatment.
Extended Producer Responsibility (EPR) and Deposit Return Schemes (DRS)
1.10 The introduction of EPR for packaging in 2025 and a DRS for drinks containers
by 2027 is expected to reduce municipal residual waste (by an estimated c18% by
2035 compared to 2020 levels, according to Government analysis) by incentivising
recycling and waste reduction at source.
Plastic and Waste Export Bans
1.11 Changes in global markets and potential bans on exporting certain wastes (like
plastics) may require more domestic reprocessing capacity, affecting local facility
needs.
Local and Regional Context
1.12 There is an existing adopted ‘Natural Resources and Waste Local Plan’
(NRWLP) 2013 for Leeds, which sets out waste planning strategy to 2026. That plan
identified Leeds as the largest waste producer in West Yorkshire, generating an
estimated c2 million tonnes per year, with construction/ demolition waste as the
largest fraction. The vision was for ‘a zero waste, high recycling society’ – supporting
waste reduction, maximised reuse/recycling, and minimal landfill. Since 2013,
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 10 of 60
progress has been made in Leeds (e.g. opening of the RERF energy recovery
facility and improvements in LACW recycling rates), but some targets (like recycling
50% of household waste) remain challenging. The new Local Plan update extends to
2042, requiring a fresh assessment of waste capacity requirements in light of current
data and future changes.
1.13 Leeds is part of the West Yorkshire sub-region, collaborating with Bradford,
Calderdale, Kirklees, and Wakefield on strategic waste issues. A West Yorkshire
Combined Authority (WYCA) waste capacity model exists (used in this study) and
the authorities have historically cooperated on waste infrastructure (for example, the
residual LACW contract for Leeds also processes some waste from Bradford). Dutyto-
Cooperate discussions will ensure that any shortfalls in one area can be
addressed by capacity in another where appropriate. In particular, regional facilities
such as the Ferrybridge Multifuel energy-from-waste plant (in Wakefield) and
regional hazardous waste sites play a role in the wider strategic waste management
network.
1.14 Leeds City Council’s priorities, such as its Climate Emergency declaration and
goals to become carbon-neutral, also influence waste planning which can contribute
to these objectives. Diverting biodegradable waste from landfill (which produces
methane) and improving resource efficiency contribute to climate change mitigation.
National Waste Management Context – Policy and Targets
1.15 Waste management in the UK is guided by the waste hierarchy and an
increasing suite of targets aimed at moving towards a circular economy. The
following national policies and targets are particularly relevant to waste planning in
Leeds:
Waste Reduction and Recycling Targets
1.16 By 2035, recycle at least 65% of municipal waste and landfill no more than 10%
of municipal waste. These targets, derived from the Circular Economy Package and
now in the Waste (England and Wales) Regulations 2011 (as amended), set a clear
direction for local authorities to dramatically increase recycling rates (current
household recycling in Leeds is c38%) and virtually eliminate landfill for household
waste over the next decade. Higher recycling targets for specific material streams
(e.g. 70% recycling of packaging by 2030) are also being implemented through EPR
schemes.
Landfill Diversion
1.17 Achieving the near-elimination of biodegradable municipal waste to landfill by
2028 is a government commitment to prevent food, paper, wood, textiles and garden
waste from being landfilled, due to their greenhouse gas impacts. It implies separate
collection and treatment of these materials (e.g. recycling, composting, anaerobic
digestion, energy recovery) must be in place. The Leeds Waste Disposal Authority
will need to ensure infrastructure or contracts to handle collected food/garden waste
by this date.
Residual Waste Reduction
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 11 of 60
1.18 The Environmental Targets (Residual Waste) Regulations 2023 set a binding
goal to halve residual waste per capita by 2042 (vs 2019). For Leeds (with a
population approaching 850,000 by 20411), this means a steep reduction in the
quantity of waste needing final disposal or treatment. Achieving this will require not
only higher recycling but also significant waste prevention (through redesign, reuse,
etc.). The target equates to 287 kg or less of residual waste per person in 2042 –
which guides long-term strategy for waste minimisation in the city.
Climate Change and Net Zero
1.19 Waste policy is linked to climate goals – e.g., the Climate Change Committee
has recommended banning biodegradable waste in landfill by 2025 to cut methane.
The City Council’s Climate Emergency agenda reinforces the need for waste policies
that reduce emissions (e.g. capturing energy from waste, electrifying waste collection
fleets, etc.). National policy also pushes for Energy from Waste facilities to supply
heat (Combined Heat and Power) to improve efficiency.
Producer Responsibility and Resource Efficiency
1.20 New or expanded schemes for Extended Producer Responsibility (starting with
packaging in 2025), a Deposit Return Scheme for beverage containers (expected
2027), and product standards (for durability, repairability) all aim to reduce waste
generation or divert it to recycling. Over the plan period, these measures should
reduce certain waste streams (e.g. less packaging in residual waste) and change
composition (e.g. more source-separated recyclables).
1.21 In summary, the national policy context is one of driving waste up the hierarchy
– prevention, reuse, and recycling – and minimising landfill. The Leeds WNA
incorporates these trajectories by modelling scenarios with increasing recycling
performance and reducing residual waste.
Approach and Methodology
1.22 The WNA methodology follows established guidance (including Defra’s Waste
Needs Assessment guidance and the approach developed by the Yorkshire and
Humber Waste Technical Advisory Body), adapted to circumstances in Leeds. The
methodology comprises the five main steps described below.
1. Establish Current Waste Arisings (Baseline)
1.23 Determine how much waste of each type is currently produced in Leeds. For
non-LACW, the West Yorkshire Waste Capacity Model (WYWCM) data (2017
baseline) apportioned to Leeds based on relevant metrics (e.g. population or
economic activity) was used. For example, Leeds accounts for about 37% of West
Yorkshire’s C&I waste (using GVA as a proxy) and c48% of the sub-region’s C&D
waste (based on construction activity). These factors were applied to the West
Yorkshire totals to estimate Leeds-specific arisings values. Local Authority Collected
Waste was taken from actual Council data (e.g. 323,000 tonnes in 2021/22). The
baseline provides a starting point (around 2022) for each waste stream. (Appendix 1
details the derivation of baseline arisings and the apportionment factors used.)
1 https://observatory.leeds.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2022/06/JSA-Summary-Report-Oct-21-FINAL-
1-1.pdf
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 12 of 60
2. Project Future Waste Arisings (Growth Rates)
1.24 Apply growth assumptions to each waste stream to forecast how annual
arisings may change by 2042. Two growth scenarios were modelled:
• Median Growth Scenario: Assumes moderate growth reflecting historical
trends or central forecasts. For Leeds, this meant near-zero growth for
construction waste (0% p.a., per PPG recommendations for C&D) and
agricultural waste (0% p.a.), modest growth for LACW (c0.37% p.a., based on
recent household waste trends), and moderate growth for C&I and hazardous
waste (c0.33% p.a., aligned with the WYCA model’s median scenario).
• Maximum Growth Scenario: A higher growth outlook providing an upper
bound. This scenario assumes higher annual growth rates were assumed for
key waste streams (e.g. C&I waste at 0.5% p.a., LACW at 0.4% p.a.). For
C&D and Excavation waste, which had 0% in the median case, a cautious
growth of 0.33% p.a. was applied (recognising potential increases in
development activity). Even this ‘maximum’ scenario is relatively restrained
(for example, it uses 0.5% for C&I waste vs the WYCA model’s own high of
0.71%, on the rationale that 0.71% seemed excessive given current UK
economic forecasts). Both scenarios extend to 2042, ensuring the 15-year
horizon from plan adoption as required by NPPF.
1.25 These growth rates were used to calculate 2042 arisings for each waste type.
(Intermediate years can be interpolated but for this outline assessment the focus is
on requirements at the end of the Plan period.) The resulting forecasts are shown in
Table 2 in Section 3. In general, the maximum scenario yields only slightly higher
quantities than the median – reflecting that waste generation in Leeds is not
expected to grow dramatically, due in part to waste prevention efforts and economic
trends (more efficient resource use).
3. Define Future Waste Management Profiles (Management Scenarios)
1.26 Determine how the forecast waste in 2042 is likely to be managed by method
(recycled, composted, recovered, landfilled, etc.), taking into account future targets
and initiatives. Two management scenarios were considered for the end-state
(2042):
• Scenario 1: Achievement of Recycling Targets – This scenario assumes that
national recycling targets (65% municipal recycling by 2035) are met or
exceeded. By 2042, high recycling rates were assumed to have been
achieved for each waste stream e.g. 65% recycling for LACW, 75% for C&I
waste, 95% for C&D waste (consistent with current best practice in the
construction sector), and similarly ambitious values for other waste streams
(see Tables in Appendix 4). Residual wastes under this scenario are allocated
largely to energy recovery (EfW) with only a minimal landfill fraction (e.g. c1%
of LACW and C&I waste to landfill, essentially for contingency/disposal of
process rejects). This scenario reflects a policy-driven push to maximise
recycling.
• Scenario 2: Residual Waste Reduction Lead – This scenario is driven by the
2042 residual waste target (287 kg per person). It assumes even greater
waste reduction and recycling by 2042 to achieve the per-capita residual goal.
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 13 of 60
In practice, for LACW this meant a recycling rate of c79% by 2042
(considerably above the 65% minimum) and corresponding deeper reductions
in residual waste. C&I waste was adjusted to a similar 79% recycling. The net
effect is less waste needing disposal than Scenario 1, albeit from a slightly
higher total waste arising (because this pairs with the maximum growth
scenario). Scenario 2 can be seen as a ‘high recycling, high growth’ scenario,
whereas Scenario 1 is ‘moderate recycling, moderate growth’. Table 3
(Section 3) details the percentage breakdown of the different types of
management of each waste stream under both scenarios.
1.27 Both scenarios incorporate national policy commitments such as 10% or less
municipal waste to landfill for and virtually eliminating biodegradable waste to landfill
by 2028 – effectively only a token landfill amount (around 1%) was modelled for nonhazardous
waste, to account for residues that cannot be otherwise recovered. For
C&D and Excavation waste, continued high rates of reuse/recovery (e.g. use of
excavated soils in restoration projects) were assumed, but acknowledged that a
portion (especially of Excavation soils) might still require disposal due to
contamination or lack of reuse opportunities.
1.28 Appendix 4 provides the detailed management profile assumptions and
justification for the chosen percentages, referencing national targets and local
performance data.
4. Assess Existing Waste Management Capacity
1.29 Capacity of current waste management facilities in Leeds and the waste types
they handle was primarily based on the WYCA Waste Capacity database, which lists
all permitted waste sites in Leeds (around 100 facilities) and their capacities by
broad management category (see Appendix 2). For landfill capacity, the Environment
Agency landfill void data (2023) and local knowledge was utilised.
1.30 An important part of this step was to classify each facility’s capacity by waste
stream and management method, to enable comparison with the requirements from
step 3. Some facilities handle multiple waste streams or have vague permit
descriptions, so a number of assumptions were made (documented in Appendix 2).
For example, sites handling both LACW and C&I waste were split 50:50 in capacity
between those waste streams (unless specific data indicated otherwise).
• Transfer stations (with no end disposal on-site) were generally treated as
contributing to recycling capacity (on the premise that they facilitate waste
going on to recycling) – except for hazardous waste transfers, which were
kept separate.
• ‘Treatment’ facilities (a generic term) were assumed to equate to recycling if
they produce usable outputs, and vehicle depollution sites were counted
under hazardous waste recycling (recovering scrap metals etc.).
• The capacity values in the database often reflect permitted maximum
throughput. In reality actual throughput can be lower. The permitted (or
design) capacities were applied as the best available measure, but it should
be noted this may overstate practical capacity in some cases.
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 14 of 60
1.31 After assigning each site’s capacity to waste streams and management
methods, these were aggregated to derive total capacity values (tonnes per annum,
or tonnes for landfill void) by stream and method. Table 1 in Section 4 provides a
summary of the existing waste management capacity in Leeds by waste stream and
management type, based on this analysis. In simple terms, there is substantial
capacity for recycling (metals recycling yards, material recovery facilities, aggregate
recycling, etc.), significant EfW capacity (one major plant and some smaller
facilities), no active non-hazardous landfill capacity, finite inert landfill/beneficial
reuse capacity (two sites as mentioned), one hazardous treatment facility, and a few
hazardous waste transfer stations.
5. Identify Capacity Gaps or Surpluses
1.32 Finally, the future waste management requirements (from step 3’s scenarios)
were compared with the current available capacity (from step 4) for each waste
stream and management category. This identifies where Leeds would have a
shortfall (‘capacity gap’) – meaning the forecast waste needing management
exceeds the capacity in Leeds – and where there would be a surplus (capacity
exceeds the need, implying Leeds could import waste or has more than enough
capacity). The analysis was done for both Scenario 1 and Scenario 2 at 2042 to see
how different assumptions might change the balance. Gaps/surpluses are generally
expressed in tonnes per annum (tpa) for throughput capacity or total tonnage for
landfill. A negative (-) value indicates a gap (deficit), while a positive value indicates
a surplus (excess capacity). For example, if there is 500,000 tpa of recycling
capacity in Leeds but the modelled requirement is 450,000 tpa, that would show as
+50,000 tpa (surplus). Conversely, zero capacity with 100,000 tpa need would be -
100,000 tpa (gap).
1.33 It is important to emphasise that these values are broad, indicative estimates.
Spurious precision has been avoided by rounding results to the nearest hundred or
thousand tonnes and should be interpreted as orders of magnitude. The reliability of
the gap analysis is constrained by data accuracy (e.g. any overestimation of capacity
would understate a gap) and by the assumptions in the scenarios (e.g. if recycling
performance is lower than assumed, residual waste needs would be higher).
Nonetheless, this step highlights the key areas where planning intervention may be
required (gaps) and where Leeds has strength or flexibility (surpluses). The findings
are presented in Section 5, including a summary table of surpluses/gaps by
management type.
1.34 This methodology aligns with national guidance (PPG) which suggests using a
mix of extrapolation, trend analysis, and scenario testing to predict future waste
needs, and anticipates consideration of strategic capacity beyond Plan areas.
Assumptions and caveats are clearly noted where relevant in this report, and further
detailed calculations are provided in the Appendices for transparency. In particular,
given the ‘outline’ nature of this WNA, certain limitations (e.g. lack of up-to- date site
throughput data, or not fully accounting for unrecorded waste like that managed
under exemptions or re-used on site) mean the results should be used with caution.
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 15 of 60
Overview of Key Waste Streams in Leeds
1.35 The following provide information on the relative scale and nature of the main
waste streams in Leeds:
Construction, Demolition and Excavation (CD&E) Waste
1.36 This is the single largest source of waste in Leeds. Based on the baseline
estimates, CD&E waste (including soils) accounts for roughly 43% of all waste
generated in Leeds. In 2022, this is estimated to be about 979,000 tonnes (272,500t
of C&D waste materials and 706,100t of excavation soils). This waste stream comes
from construction sites, infrastructure projects, building demolitions, and excavations
(foundations, utilities, etc.). A large proportion of C&D waste (e.g. bricks, concrete,
metals) is already recovered or recycled by the industry – often crushed for
aggregate or sent for off-site recycling. Excavation waste (mostly clean spoil) can be
reused in landscaping or quarry restoration. Leeds, as a growing city, will continue to
produce high volumes of CD&E waste, but much of it is inert material. The
management focus is on reusing this material beneficially and providing enough sites
for any excess to be deposited (as inert fill) without causing environmental harm.
CD&E waste is usually non-hazardous (except certain components like asbestos in
demolition waste).
Commercial & Industrial (C&I) Waste
1.37 This is the next largest contributor at around 40% of total waste arising in
Leeds, estimated to be about 930,000 tpa currently. It includes a broad range of
wastes from businesses – for example, packaging waste, food waste from
restaurants, paper/card from offices, process waste from factories, and so on. The
composition of C&I waste is heterogeneous; a significant portion can be recycled
(paper, cardboard, plastics, wood, metals) if segregated. Unlike household waste,
C&I waste management is largely market-driven (private contracts). Leeds, being an
economic centre with numerous industries, generates substantial C&I waste. Trends
affecting C&I waste include economic growth, changes in manufacturing processes,
and waste prevention efforts by businesses. Commercial wastes may be managed
alongside LACW at the same facilities (e.g. a commercial skip of general waste
might end up at the same energy-from-waste plant as household waste). In Leeds, a
large quantity of C&I waste recycling is handled by scrap yards, material recycling
facilities and specialist contractors present in the city.
Local Authority Collected Waste (LACW)
1.38 This waste stream is most visible to residents, though it forms only about 14%
of total waste by weight. In 2021/22, approximately 323,000 tonnes of LACW was
collected in Leeds. This includes household waste (residual black-bin waste,
kerbside recyclables, garden waste, household bulky items, etc.) as well as some
commercial waste collected by the Council (e.g. from schools or businesses that use
Council trade waste services). LACW composition is roughly: c55% household
residual waste (much of which is organic or recyclable material); c20% collected
recyclables (paper, glass, plastics, metals); c15% garden waste; and the rest from
services like street sweepings and bulky waste. Leeds has made strides in diverting
waste from landfill by sending residual waste to the RERF for energy recovery and
increasing recycling to about 38%. Still, a large fraction of LACW is not recycled.
With upcoming policies like universal food waste collection, the composition will
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 16 of 60
change (food will shift from residual to an organic waste stream). LACW tends to
grow in line with population, but waste prevention campaigns and lighter- weight
packaging have kept growth low.
Hazardous Waste
1.39 Hazardous waste is a small fraction (c3%) of waste arising in Leeds, but it
requires special attention due to its nature. c77,000 tonnes of hazardous waste is
produced annually in Leeds. This includes a wide range of materials e.g.
contaminated soils from brownfield sites, asbestos materials, industrial solvents and
chemicals, waste oils, lead-acid batteries, clinical wastes, certain electronic wastes,
and so on. Some hazardous wastes are generated by households too (like paint,
pesticides) but in small quantities. The majority is from commercial/industrial
activities (for example, a chemical plant or hospital waste incinerator ash). Because
hazardous waste facilities are specialist and relatively small in number, a lot of
hazardous waste produced in Leeds is exported for treatment or landfill (e.g. stable
non-reactive hazardous waste to dedicated landfills in other areas, or waste oils to
recovery facilities). The hazardous waste stream in Leeds is not expected to grow
significantly; it may even decline if cleanup of contaminated sites is completed and
as regulations phase out certain hazardous substances. However, managing legacy
hazardous materials (like asbestos from building refurbishments) will still require
capacity. Ensuring Leeds has access to regional hazardous waste infrastructure (or
developing more local capacity for certain hazardous streams) is part of planning for
this waste type.
Agricultural Waste
1.40 Agriculture is a minor land use in Leeds (some farms on the outskirts).
Agricultural waste (excluding manure used on farms) is estimated at only 2,900 tpa (
<1% of total waste). These wastes could include farm plastics, agrochemical
containers, etc., much of which are handled by specialist take-back schemes. Given
its negligible scale and the likelihood that farmers deal with many wastes on-site or
via niche services, agricultural waste does not drive major capacity needs for Leeds.
It is noted for completeness, but no capacity gaps are identified specific to
agriculture (other than that agricultural waste can generally be handled at C&I or
hazardous waste facilities depending on the type).
1.41 In summary, CD&E waste and C&I waste dominate waste arisings in Leeds,
and thus the capacity for recycling aggregates, managing excavation soils, and
processing commercial waste streams is crucial. LACW, while smaller in tonnage
must meet clear recycling and diversion targets. Hazardous waste, though small in
quantity, poses unique challenges that typically rely on regional solutions.
Agricultural waste is minimal and has no significant impact on capacity planning.
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 17 of 60
2. Principal Data Sources
2.1 This WNA has been prepared using several key data sources which are
described below.
2.2 West Yorkshire Combined Authority Waste Capacity Model (WYWCM)
This is a Microsoft Access database originally developed in 2016 by WYCA to
assess waste arisings and capacities for each of the West Yorkshire authorities. It
provides baseline (2017) tonnages for each waste stream at a local planning
authority level and includes a comprehensive list of waste management facilities
(with their permit details and capacities) in the sub-region. The WYWCM was used
as the starting point for both arisings (apportioning West Yorkshire totals to Leeds –
see Appendix 1) and capacity (filtering the database for sites in Leeds (see Appendix
2)). The model’s in-built scenarios were not fully relied on (they include obsolete
growth rates and targets), but it was an important source of raw data. NB. The model
doesn’t cover certain wastes (like sewage sludge or radioactive waste).
Environment Agency Waste Data Interrogator (WDI)
2.3 The EA’s Waste Data Interrogator is an annual dataset detailing waste
movements (by origin, destination, tonnage, and waste type) for permitted facilities.
The 2021 WDI was utilised to derive a value for residual waste arisings which was
used to inform the Scenario 2 management profile. The WDI was also used to crosscheck
baseline values. The 2022 WDI indicated around 2.1 million tonnes of waste
from Leeds was handled at EA permitted sites, which gave confidence that the
estimated total baseline (2.29 Mt) is in the right order. While the WDI is
comprehensive, it has limitations as some site returns have errors or use broad
waste codes, and it doesn’t capture unpermitted or activity at exempt sites.
WasteDataFlow (WDF)
2.4 This is the national database for local authority collected waste statistics. Data on
Leeds City Council’s LACW tonnages, recycling rates, disposal routes, etc., were
derived from WDF (e.g. for 2021/22, LACW tonnages by material). WDF was used to
ensure the LACW baseline is exact. WDF also provides information on current
performance that underpins the growth/recycling scenarios (for example, knowing
the current recycling rate helps in projecting to future targets). WDF is very reliable
for the LACW stream and is the source for all local authority reported waste KPIs.
Environment Agency Landfill Void Data
2.5 The EA publishes annual data for remaining landfill capacities for each permitted
landfill. 2023 data was used for the Blackhill Quarry landfill which showed this had
501,086 m³ of void remaining at end 2023. Britannia Quarry capacity is uncertain – it
has permission to be filled to original ground levels with inert waste, but no
volumetric figure was readily available; Council officer insight suggests it could take
several hundred thousand tonnes, but activity there has been limited recently. The
EA data confirmed that there are currently no active non-hazardous or hazardous
landfill voids in Leeds.
Leeds City Council site intelligence
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 18 of 60
2.6 Council officers provided updates on any new facilities or changes not yet
reflected in EA databases. For example, if a waste site recently expanded or closed,
or if a permit was granted in 2023 outside the EA 2022 datasets, then this
information was taken into account.
2.7 Operators will have a chance to validate capacity assumptions during
consultation, but at this outline stage local knowledge has been used where
available (e.g. adjustments to capacity where double-counting was suspected in the
database, or reclassification of a misidentified site such as the BW Skip Hire site,
which the WYCA database listed under an incorrect category and was corrected as a
C&D waste recycling facility).
2.8 Combining these sources has helped ensure consistency, for example, the
baseline total arisings from the apportionment method was compared against the
WDI recorded tonnage for Leeds waste in the same year, to check for large
discrepancies (they were within c10%, which is acceptable given some wastes are
not captured in WDI).
Data Limitations
• The WYCA capacity data lacks a user guide, and capacities may not always
represent usable throughput. It has been assumed that permitted capacity
equals actual, which may result in an overestimate in some cases.
• There may be overlap between facilities (e.g. one site handling multiple waste
codes could be counted in multiple categories). Each site’s capacity was
allocated to a primary function to avoid double counting, but some judgement
was involved.
• Some waste arisings are not recorded (exempt sites managing <50,000 tpa of
inert waste, on-site reuse under the DoWCoP, fly-tipped waste, etc.). These
could mean actual waste generation is higher than reported, but the capacity
analysis inherently focuses on permitted infrastructure, so as long as those
exemptions don’t strain capacity, this is not considered a significant issue.
2.9 By using multiple data sources, confidence in the assessment was improved. For
example, knowing the 2022 AMR recorded 2.1 Mt of waste handled in Leeds
suggests that the estimate of c2.29 Mt generated is ‘in the right ball park’ (the slight
difference could be accounted for by exports or timing). It can therefore be said that
the data underpinning this high level WNA is sufficiently robust.
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 19 of 60
3. Current Waste Arisings and Capacity Overview
3.1 This section provides an overview of waste arisings in Leeds used as a baseline
and a summary of existing waste management capacity in the Plan area.
Baseline Waste Arisings
3.2 Using the methodology described, baseline annual waste arisings for Leeds were
estimated. Table 1 below summarises the baseline tonnages by waste type:
Table 1: Estimated Annual Waste Arisings in Leeds
Waste type
2017 West
Yorks Arisings % Leeds
Leeds
Arisings
Leeds
Rounded
Arisings
Agricultural 10,261 28.70% 2,945 2,900
C&I 2,472,581 36.80% 909,910 909,900
C&D 571,447 47.70% 272,580 272,500
Excavation 1,480,248 47.70% 706,078 706,100
Hazardous 208,731 36.80% 76,813 76,800
LACW N/A N/A 323,059 323,100
Total 2,291,300
3.3 Key points from the baseline data are as follows:
• c2.3 million tonnes of waste is produced in Leeds each year. This confirms
Leeds as one of the largest waste producers in the region (as expected given
its population and economic size).
• Construction, Demolition and Excavation (CD&E) waste dominates, at roughly
43% of the total (272,500 + 706,100 = 978,600 tonnes). This reflects the
ongoing construction activity in the Plan area. Within CD&E, excavation (soils)
is particularly large – almost three-quarters of CD&E tonnage. However, these
materials are largely inert.
• Commercial & Industrial waste is the second-largest category at c910,000t
(about 40%). It covers a vast range of waste streams, from manufacturing
scrap to retail packaging.
• LACW at 323,100t forms a significant but smaller share (around 14%).
• Hazardous waste (76,800t) is relatively small in tonnage (c3%) but includes
some high-cost management items. A notable portion of this is contaminated
soil and asbestos from redevelopment sites, as well as industrial process
wastes.
• Agricultural waste is negligible in Leeds (c2,900t), as might be expected for an
urban area.
3.4 The Leeds Authority Monitoring Report 2022/23 corroborated these proportions,
noting that construction, demolition and excavation waste and C&I waste are the
major contributors, while municipal waste is a quarter or less. (The AMR indicated
‘municipal’ around 25% of waste, which likely counted some overlap or a different
definition).
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 20 of 60
3.5 Overall, the baseline confirms that efforts to manage waste in Leeds must pay
particular attention to the large quantities of CD&E and C&I waste. It also highlights
opportunities, for example, the large quantity of excavation waste suggests potential
for reuse in restoration projects.
Existing Waste Management Capacity in Leeds
3.6 There is a broad range of waste management facilities in Leeds. Based on the
WYCA database and updates, Table 2 below presents a summary of the estimated
existing waste management capacity in Leeds by waste stream and management
method. This essentially catalogues how much waste could be managed within
Leeds in each category per year (for treatment) or in total (for landfill void).
Table 2: Estimated Existing Waste Management Capacity in Leeds
Source: WYCA waste capacity model and EA landfill database.
Waste
Stream
Recycling2
(Tpa)
Compost EFW
(Tpa)
Beneficial
Deposit
(Tonnes)
Non Haz
Landfill
(T)
Haz
Landfill
(T)
Haz
waste
TFS
(Tpa)
Haz
waste
treat’t
(Tpa) (Tpa)
Agricultural N/A3 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0 0
C&I 1,238,805 40,0004 434,100 0 0 0 0 0
C&D 427,929 0 110,513 0 0 0 0 0
Excavation 0 0 0 398,818 501,086 0 0 0
Hazardous 103 0 0 0 0 0 21,559 30,150
LACW 1,040,931 14,339 200,000 0 0 0 0 0
Total 2,707,768 54,339 744,613 899,9045 0 0 21,559 30,150
3.7 Table 2 shows the following:
Recycling Capacity
3.8 It is estimated that there is a total of over 2.7 million tonnes per annum of
recycling capacity in Leeds (LACW, C&I, and C&D wastes). This includes major
metal recyclers, the City Council’s material recovery facility (MRF) for dry
recyclables, several private commercial waste MRFs, aggregate crushing/recycling
sites for C&D waste. The largest contributions are in LACW (the 1.04 Mt value
includes the input capacity of the RERF’s front-end mechanical pre-treatment which
can recover recyclables, plus transfer stations handling recyclable materials, etc.)
and in C&I waste (1.24 Mt, which likely includes scrap metal yards with large
throughput capacity). This capacity exceeds current arisings – suggesting a surplus,
2 Recycling includes material recycling facilities, inert waste recycling, and any treatment producing
recovered materials.
3 N/A = not applicable (stream typically managed within other categories)
4 This relates to a single Yorkshire Waste Service AD facility managing sewage sludge which
currently cannot be utilised for composting green or food wastes from other sources.
5 Beneficial Deposit refers to capacity for using inert material in restoration or land reclamation
(including inert landfill). The total capacity includes the tonnage identified within ‘Non Haz Landfill’
category as this capacity relates to inert excavation waste used for restoration of non haz landfills.
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 21 of 60
although ‘excess’ capacity is likely utilised to manage waste arising in other areas.
For example, metal recyclers in Leeds might be treating metal scrap from across
West Yorkshire, not just Leeds. Nonetheless, it indicates Leeds is well supplied with
recycling infrastructure. The C&D waste recycling capacity (427,929 tpa) is also
notable – this includes a few large construction and demolition waste recycling
operations which can process construction waste into recycled aggregates.
Organic Waste/Composting
3.9 Table 2 shows 54,339 tpa in Leeds. However, 40,000tpa under this category
relates to a single Yorkshire Waste Serviced AD facility used for managing sewage
sludge which is therefore an ‘in-house’ facility that cannot contribute to composting
green or food wastes from other sources. The Council currently sends collected
garden waste to a composting site in Bradford. Food waste is not yet separately
collected (though it is planned), so it currently goes to the RERF (EfW). This lack of
local organics capacity suggests an opportunity to develop a facility in the future
(especially in light of imminent separate food waste collection requirements) or rely
on facilities in other areas.
Energy from Waste (EfW) Capacity
3.10 The Leeds RERF (operated by Veolia) contributes the bulk of the 200,000 tpa
for LACW. The 434,100 tpa listed for C&I waste likely represents capacities at
facilities like RDF production or merchant EfW accessible to commercial waste
produced in Leeds. Also, 110,513 tpa for C&D waste corresponds to capacity to
incinerate waste wood or other combustibles from construction (possibly at biomass
plants or co-incineration). In total, around c745,000 tpa of EfW capacity exists that
could handle residual waste produced in Leeds. This far exceeds the residual waste
currently produced in Leeds (c400,000 tpa across all waste streams), highlighting a
surplus in residual waste treatment capacity. This is consistent with the fact that the
RERF often operates below full capacity managing just waste from Leeds and also
manages waste from other areas. It’s also worth noting Leeds is within reasonable
transport distance of large residual waste facilities outside of the Plan area such as
energy recovery at Ferrybridge.
Landfill and Inert Fill
3.11 There is no non-hazardous or hazardous landfill capacity in Leeds thus 100% of
that need is met by exporting waste. The only disposal capacity is for inert waste at
Blackhill Quarry which has c0.5 million tonnes (or m³) void remaining. Britannia
Quarry can accept inert waste for restoration (capacity not formally quantified, so an
estimate of c0.4 million tonnes has been included). Combined, roughly 0.9 million
tonnes of inert waste capacity remains. In context, c0.7 million tonnes of excavation
waste is estimated to be produced in Leeds each year, so this void would be filled in
less than two years if all excavation waste was managed in Leeds. In practice much
excavation waste is traditionally reused on development sites (under exemptions) or
goes to other sites in the region, so the actual fill rate is slower. But this emphasises
that inert deposit to land capacity is a scarce finite resource locally.
Hazardous Waste Management Capacity
3.12 There appear to be several hazardous waste treatment facilities in Leeds.
There are also some hazardous waste transfer stations (with a combined throughput
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 22 of 60
capacity around 21,559 tpa), which consolidate hazardous wastes for shipment
elsewhere. A very small capacity (103 tpa) is noted under hazardous recycling – this
could be the result of classifying a vehicle depollution site as ‘hazardous waste
recycling’ (since end-of-life vehicles are hazardous until depolluted). In effect,
hazardous waste handling in Leeds is limited, and anything beyond c30k treatment
or any need for hazardous landfill has to be dealt with beyond the Plan area.
3.13 In summary, the existing waste management capacity profile in Leeds is
characterised by excess capacity in recycling and other recovery, and deficient
capacity in final disposal and certain specialist treatments. The city hosts many
private waste companies that provide capacity well above what the city alone
requires for recycling metals, construction materials, etc. Conversely, the deliberate
policy shift away from landfill means there is no non-hazardous waste landfill
capacity in Leeds which is a capacity gap addressed by using facilities in other
areas. The inert waste void capacity, while currently adequate in the short term, is
insufficient long-term if all excavation waste produced in Leeds were to be managed
at dedicated land disposal sites in the Plan area.
Caveats on Capacity Data
3.14 It should be noted that the above capacity values, particularly the large ones for
recycling, are likely upper limits. For example, the listed 1.04 million tpa ‘LACW
recycling’ capacity might include the maximum throughput of several transfer
stations or MRFs that in practice handle far less. The actual operational capacity (or
throughput in recent years) could be lower. Likewise, some facilities counted under
C&I waste recycling may not currently operate at full capacity. The implication is that
while there appears to be a large surplus, available capacity in practice might be
somewhat less. Nonetheless, the scale of surplus is such that even if halved, there
would likely be sufficient capacity to meet requirements for recycling (not including
composting) waste arising in Leeds.
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 23 of 60
4. Assessing the Waste Management Capacity Gap in Leeds
4.1 Using the information on future waste arisings (demand) and existing capacities
(supply), capacity gaps or surpluses likely by 2042 can be determined. The position
is considered in terms of net self-sufficiency and an analysis by waste stream is
provided. Two scenarios – Median Growth with Recycling Targets (Scenario 1) and
Maximum Growth with Residual Reduction (Scenario 2) – are compared to assess
the sensitivity of the gaps to different assumptions.
Principle of Net Self-Sufficiency
Net self-sufficiency means having enough capacity within the Plan area to
manage an amount of waste equivalent to that generated within the area. The
principle takes account of waste moving across Plan area boundaries as part
of normal commercial arrangements. Net self- sufficiency is achieved if
exports are balanced by imports or unused local waste capacity.
4.2 The current position with regard to net self sufficiency for different management
capacities is as follows:
Recycling and Other Recovery
4.3 Leeds is currently net self-sufficient or better. It has surplus capacity and most
likely imports waste for recycling/EfW.
Landfill
4.4 Leeds is not self- sufficient for landfill. Waste requiring landfill is essentially
exported for management and there are no sites which can receive waste from
elsewhere.
Hazardous Waste
4.5 Leeds is not self-sufficient for final hazardous waste treatment/disposal with the
majority being exported. There are facilities in Leeds which may treat some waste
from other areas but more hazardous waste is exported from Leeds for management
than is imported. In terms of transfer, capacity in Leeds might handle some waste
from other areas (e.g. regional hazardous waste contractors in Leeds are likely to
serve clients beyond Leeds), which could make Leeds a net importer.
Inert Waste to Land
4.6 There is some inert waste void capacity in Leeds and likely imports some inert
waste from adjacent areas to those sites (likely when contractors find it convenient if
a site they are working is in relatively proximate. However, inert waste is likely
exported from Leeds to other sites (if those are closer to a construction project or
cheaper). On balance, given the scale of construction in Leeds, it’s likely more inert
waste is exported from Leeds than is imported.
Conclusion on Net Self-Sufficiency
4.7 Leeds can be considered net self-sufficient for waste management needs except
in the categories of final disposal (landfill) and certain hazardous waste operations.
This is similar to many urban authorities which have high levels of processing
capacity but are reliant on strategic landfill in other areas.
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 24 of 60
Future Waste Management Requirements by Waste Stream
4.8 Using the forecast arisings and assumed management profile from Section 3 (for
Scenarios 1 and 2), the quantity of waste requiring each type of management in
2042 for each waste stream were calculated. These ‘requirements’ were then
compared to available capacity in Leeds in that category (from Section 3) to find
gaps or surpluses. The results of this exercise are shown in the Tables 3 and 4
below.
4.9 Note that in these tables, values shown in green are surpluses and values shown
in red are shortfalls (gaps).
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 25 of 60
Table 3 Estimated Waste Management Capacity Gaps/Surpluses at 2042 (Median Growth - Recycling Targets Lead scenario)
Waste
Stream
Recycling
(Tpa)
EFW (Tpa)
Beneficial
Deposit (T)
Non Haz
Landfill (T)
Haz
Landfill (T)
Haz waste
TFS (Tpa)
Haz waste
treatment
Compostg
(Tpa) (Tpa)
Agricultural6 N/A N/A N/A
see total
below
see total
below
0 0 0
C&I 498,000 197,000 0
see total
below
see total
below
0 0 40,000
C&D 169,000 100,00 0
see total
below
see total
below
0 0 0
Excavation -35,300 0 -10,500,000
see total
below
see total
below
0 0 0
Hazardous 100 0 0
see total
below
see total
below
21,600 -49,000 0
LACW 815,600 82,200 0
see total
below
see total
below
0 0 14,300
Total 1,447,400 379,200 -10,500,000 -1,001,000 -112,300 21600 -49,000 54,300
6 Agricultural waste management capacity gaps have not been separately identified as it is assumed the small quantities arising for management off site
would be managed at sites managing C&I and C&D waste.
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 26 of 60
Table 4 Estimated Waste Management Capacity Gaps/Surpluses at 2042 (Maximum Growth - Residual Waste Target Lead scenario)
Waste
Stream
Recycling
(Tpa)
EFW
(Tpa)
Beneficial
Deposit (T)
Non Haz
Landfill
(T)
Haz
Landfill
(T)
Haz
waste
TFS
(Tpa)
Haz waste
treatment
Composting
(Tpa) (Tpa)
Agricultural7 N/A N/A N/A
see total
below
see total
below
0 0 0
C&I 424,500 228,000 0
see total
below
see total
below
0 0 40,000
C&D 147,000 98,600 0
see total
below
see total
below
0 0 0
Excavation -38,300 0 -11,483,000
see total
below
see total
below
0 0 0
Hazardous 100 0 0
see total
below
see total
below
21,600 -52,500 0
LACW 766,700 130,600 0
see total
below
see total
below
0 0 14,300
Total 1,300,000 457,200 -11,483,000
-
1,024,000
-129,000 21,600 -52,500 54,300
7 Agricultural waste management capacity gaps have not been separately identified as it is assumed the small quantities arising for management off site
would be managed at sites managing C&I and C&D waste.
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 27 of 60
4.10 The capacity gap findings for each waste stream are described and discussed
below.
Local Authority Collected Waste (LACW)
4.11 LACW in 2042 – projected arisings:
- Scenario 1 (median growth): c346,500 tonnes.
- Scenario 2 (max growth): c348,600 tonnes (virtually the same, as growth
rates differ only slightly).
4.12 This is only a modest increase from c323,000t in 2022, due to low annual
growth (0.3–0.4%). This reflects assumptions of only a slight rise in waste per
household, offset by prevention measures (e.g. lighter packaging, etc.).
4.13 Management profiles at 2042:
- Scenario 1: 65% recycling by 2042 (this aligns with achieving the 2035 target
and holding that level). The remaining 35% goes to residual treatment
(assumed c34% to EfW, 1% to landfill). Also included in ‘recycling’ is
composting of organics (the 65% includes food/garden waste recycling).
- Scenario 2: 79% recycling by 2042. This ambitious level comes from driving
down residual waste to meet the 287 kg per person target. Residual LACW
would then be c21% (20% to EfW, 1% to landfill).
4.14 Forecast Requirements:
- Scenario 1: c225,000t recycled/composted; c118,000t residual to EfW;
c3,500t to landfill.
- Scenario 2: c275,000t recycled/composted; c70,000t residual to EfW; c3,500t
to landfill.
4.15 Capacity vs Requirement (LACW):
- Recycling/Composting: Current LACW recycling capacity is c1,041,00 tpa
(which included transfer). Even if some is discounted as transfer, it is
estimated that capacity is well in excess of requirements e.g. to compost
maybe 40kt of organics (food and garden) and process c230kt of dry
recyclables (in scenario 2’s worst-case need c275kt), the 1.04Mtpa capacity
would ensure targets are met. In fact, a surplus of around 750kt+ tpa is
suggested. This surplus could allow handling of more material (and indeed
likely includes capacity not specifically needed for LACW with some facilities
counted also serving the C&I waste stream). No gap – large surplus.
- N.B Separate food waste is 20ktpa and there is currently no capacity for
managing this waste stream in Leeds. A capacity gap in local LACW
composting therefore exists, but for the high-level assessment, since overall
recycling capacity is large, the model treated it as not a shortfall (the need for
food waste treatment may be met by capacity in other areas).
- EfW: LACW EfW capacity = 200,000 tpa at the RERF. Scenario 1 needs
c118ktpa, Scenario 2 requires c70ktpa. So surplus of 82ktpa to 130ktpa would
exist. This surplus may be utilised by other wastes e.g. commercial waste. No
gap.
- Landfill: LACW landfill requirement in 2042 is c3–4kt. Capacity = 0. Landfill
requirements for LACW are added to the general non-hazardous landfill gap
The scenario tables show that over the Plan period there is a combined
cumulative non-hazardous landfill gap of -c1,001,000t. This gap may not be
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 28 of 60
sufficient to make the development of a new landfill site viable and so there
will be reliance on other areas or development of a larger strategic site.
Implications for LACW
4.16 Residual LACW arisings in Leeds, and that requiring recycling, can largely
easily be managed at existing facilities provided they remain operational to 2042 e.g.
the RERF’s current contract runs into the 2030s and so if the life is not extended
alternatives will be required. In any event the Plan should seek to safeguard these
facilities and avoid their encroachment by incompatible development nearby. There
is a relatively small annual landfill requirement that without the development of new
capacity could not be met within the Plan area, however the requirement is not
sufficient by itself to make such a development viable. Therefore, no new capacity is
needed specifically for LACW aside from possibly an organics processing solution
(which might be addressed via a contract rather than a facility in Leeds).
Alternative assumptions
4.17 LACW only achieved 55% recycling (short of target) then residual to EfW would
be c45%. That would be c155kt residual but RERF can manage 200kt so there
would still be adequate capacity.
Commercial and Industrial (C&I) Waste
4.18 C&I waste in 2042 – projected arisings:
- Scenario 1: c988,000 tonnes.
- Scenario 2: c1,031,000 tonnes.
These are increases from the c909,900t baseline via growth of 0.33%p.a. and 0.5%
p.a. respectively. C&I waste remains the largest waste stream by 2042.
4.19 Management profiles at 2042:
- Scenario 1: 75% recycling; 24% EfW; 1% landfill.
- Scenario 2: 79% recycling; 20% EfW; 1% landfill (aligned with residual waste
reduction scenario, pushing recycling a bit higher).
4.20 Forecast Requirements:
- Scenario 1: c741kt recycled; c237kt to EfW; c9.9kt to landfill.
- Scenario 2: c814kt recycled; c206kt to EfW; c10.3kt to landfill.
4.21 Capacity vs Requirement (C&I):
- Recycling: Current C&I waste recycling capacity c1,238,800 tpa. Requirement
in 2042 is 741kt–814kt. The findings showed a surplus of +498,000tpa for C&I
waste recycling in Scenario 1, and +424,000t in Scenario 2. Scenario 2
requires c74kt more recycling but still within capacity limits. This suggests the
requirement to recycle C&I waste arising within the Plan area can easily be
managed within Leeds and potentially some imported C&I waste can also be
accommodated. No gap.
- EfW: C&I waste EfW capacity is c434,000 tpa and the modelled requirement
is between 197ktpa and 228ktpa suggesting a surplus of c237ktpa (Scenario
1) or c206ktpa (Scenario 2). Due to the higher recycling rate Scenario 2 has
lower requirement for EfW as there is less residual C&I waste to be managed,
this is despite a higher forecast of total C&I waste. No gap.
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 29 of 60
- Landfill: C&I waste landfill requirement is c10ktpa. Capacity 0. Like LACW the
requirement is combined and aggregated over the Plan period to reveal a total
cumulative non-hazardous landfill gap of just over 1 million tonnes.
Implications for C&I waste
4.22 There is sufficient capacity to manage C&I waste and even if waste growth is
greater than expected, it is likely there will be sufficient capacity to accommodate it
(e.g. if growth was 1% p.a., making c1.1Mt by 2042 this would still be within capacity
availability). Surpluses in recycling and EfW mean Leeds will likely continue to be a
hub for waste processing.
4.23 A small portion of C&I waste would still go to landfill (e.g. residues or certain
wastes not suitable for EfW), which cannot be managed within Leeds though the
annual requirement of c10kt is trivial relative to regional capacity.
4.24 No new facilities are required for C&I waste, though existing capacity should be
maintained. It should be noted that some capacity (e.g. scrap metal yards) might not
operate at full permitted capacity; but even if one or more closed, this would not be
an issue due to headroom at other sites. The Plan should safeguard waste uses and
protect them from encroachment by other development to ensure ongoing resilience
in capacity.
4.25 Therefore, there is greater than net self-sufficiency in C&I waste management.
Indeed, the Plan could consider supportive policy for new reprocessing facilities (like
plastic recycling plants or textile recycling) to maximise the potential of the waste
streams available.
Construction and Demolition (C&D) Waste
4.26 C&D waste (hard materials) is considered separately to Excavation waste.
4.27 C&D waste in 2042 – projected arisings (excluding excavation):
- Scenario 1: c272,500 tonnes (same as baseline (0% growth)).
- Scenario 2: c296,000 tonnes (0.33% growth; c8% increase overall).
4.28 Management profile at 2042:
Both scenarios assumed 95% recycling; 4% other recovery (EfW – likely for wood);
1% landfill. No difference between scenarios as C&D waste management is already
approaching best practice.
4.29 Forecast Requirements:
- Scenario 1: c259kt recycled; c10.9kt to EfW (wood waste fraction c4%);
c2.7ktpa to landfill (43kt overall).
- Scenario 2: c281kt recycled; c11.8kt to EfW; c3.0ktpa to landfill (49kt overall).
4.30 Capacity vs Requirement (C&D):
- Recycling: Capacity c428,000 tpa. Requirement 259kt to 281kt. Surplus:
+169kt (Scenario 1), +147kt (Scenario 2). No gap - large surplus in C&D
waste recycling.
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 30 of 60
- EfW (assume C&D): Capacity 110,500 tpa. Requirement c11kt–12kt means
surplus of c100kt. Assumed that this is mainly for biomass i.e. waste wood.
Surplus indicates Leeds is an importer of C&D wood waste. No gap.
- Landfill: c2.7 to 3ktpa Non-hazardous landfill capacity is needed. Capacity is
0t. Cumulative gap of c46 to 49 kt included in the overall non-hazardous
landfill gap.
4.31 The above suggests there is more than sufficient capacity to recycle C&D waste
and meet requirements for EfW. In fact there appears to be excess capacity meaning
C&D waste recyclers in Leeds likely process material arising beyond the Plan area.
Annual landfill requirement is minimal.
Implications for C&D waste
4.32 No new capacity needed for C&D waste. Retention of recycling sites e.g. for the
production of recycled aggregate is important noting that some activity may be timelimited
if permission linked to a temporary use such as a construction site or a quarry
(Britannia Quarry, for example, had an aggregate recycling facility on site). The Plan
should at least seek to help ensure that aggregate recycling capacity does not
decline overall.
Excavation (E) Waste
4.33 Excavation Waste in 2042 – projected arisings:
- Scenario 1: c706,100 tonnes (no growth).
- Scenario 2: c764,700 tonnes (0.33% growth).
4.34 Management profile at 2042:
Same for both scenarios: 5% recycling, 0% EfW (not applicable), 95% beneficial
deposit/landfill. Essentially, nearly all excavation waste is deposited on land via
backfilling or inert landfill though some can be used in other beneficial applications
such as landscaping and noise mitigation bunds.
4.44 Forecast Requirements:
- Scenario 1: c35,300 tpa recycled (e.g. some soils processed/stabilised or
reused directly); c670,800 tpa deposit on land (inert use/landfill) (overall
11.4Mt).
- Scenario 2: c38,300 tpa recycled, c726,300 tpa deposit on land (overall
12.4Mt).
4.45 Capacity vs Requirement (Excavation):
- 0t capacity dedicated for recycling excavation waste (though some soil
recycling could occur at aggregate sites). Requirement c35kt–38kt i.e. a gap
of c35kt in Scenario 1 and c38kt in Scenario 2. This gap basically means
there is no soil washing plant, etc. in Leeds, that could recycle some of the
excavation waste. It’s a relatively small gap compared to total excavation
waste tonnage and realistically, a soil treatment plant for 5% of soil may not
be viable and so it may be better to focus on reuse at construction sites which
doesn’t need a standalone ‘facility’. Nonetheless, the WNA identifies a modest
gap in ability to ‘recycle’ excavation waste.
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 31 of 60
- Beneficial deposit of land: Capacity c900,000 tonnes remaining (as of c2023).
Requirement in one-year is estimated as between c670kt and c726kt.
Scenario 1 shows a -c11,400,000 tonnes gap and Scenario 2 a -c12,400,000
tonnes gap for ‘Beneficial Deposit (Tonnes)’. These significant negative
values represent the cumulative shortfall in inert deposit on land capacity from
2025 to 2042 if all excavation waste required deposit in Leeds. Essentially a
c12 million tonnes gap which is by far the largest capacity shortfall identified.
4.46 For Excavation waste there is therefore an apparent significant capacity gap
related to final deposit. There will not be enough dedicated void capacity in Leeds to
absorb excavation waste arisings beyond the early years of the Plan. This means a
heavy dependence on exporting inert waste to other areas’ quarries or land
reclamation sites making this a strategic issue. As mitigation, on-site reuse via the
DoWCoP protocols could be encouraged. If developers reuse soil on their own sites
or share soil between local sites (direct transfer under DoWCoP), then it doesn't
enter the ‘waste’ system or need permitted capacity. This practice already happens
but could be expanded, however, with the scale of construction, some surplus inert
excavation waste is inevitable.
Implications for Excavation Waste
4.47 The Plan should acknowledge the inert excavation waste capacity gap and set
out how it will be addressed. This might include working with regional partners, in
accordance with the Duty to Cooperate, to ensure sufficient regional inert waste
deposit to land capacity, and by encouraging development practices that minimise
off-site spoil. New inert waste facilities in Leeds may also be feasible with any new
quarry voids or brownfield sites potentially offering opportunities. Identifying even
small additional voids would help. Realistically though, the majority of excavation
waste will likely continue to go to large voids outside Leeds as part of site
restoration. Consideration should also be given to how the Plan could support the
beneficial deposit of inert waste associated with engineering projects such as
landscaping and flood mitigation.
Hazardous Waste
4.48 Hazardous waste in 2042 – projected arisings:
- Scenario 1: c83,100 tonnes;
- Scenario 2: c86,556 tonnes. (Both assume low rates of growth: 0.33 and 0.5%
respectively)
4.49 Management profile at 2042:
In both scenarios c95% hazardous waste is treated/recycled, 5% is managed by
hazardous landfill.
4.50 Forecast Requirements:
- Scenario 1: c83,000t to hazardous treatment/recovery per annum, c4,200t to
hazardous landfill per annum (cumulative total over the Plan period =
69,049t);
- Scenario 2: c87,000t to hazardous treatment, c4,350 t to hazardous landfill
per annum (cumulative total over the Plan period = 71,100t).
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 32 of 60
4.51 Capacity vs Requirement (Hazardous):
- Hazardous Treatment/Recycling: Capacity is 30,150 tpa. Requirement 83kt–
87kt resulting in capacity gaps: c -53kt (Scenario 1), -57kt (Scenario 2). This
is significant and requires development of additional capacity within Leeds or
export of 60 to 64% of hazardous waste for management beyond the Plan
area.
- Hazardous Landfill: Capacity 0. Cumulative requirement of between c112kt
(Scenario 1) and c129kt (Scenario 2) over the Plan period (based on declining
linear trend of arisings requiring landfill to achieve treatment targets at the end
of the Plan period). Annual landfill requirements are regionally relatively minor
as a single hazardous landfill site would typically manage tens of thousands of
tonnes per year.
- Hazardous Transfer: Existing capacity of c21,500tpa recorded though as this
does not offer final fate management, the need for transfer has not been
specifically identified and hence this is shown as a surplus.
4.52 For hazardous waste there is a clear capacity gap in treatment (55ktpa range),
and no local disposal. Without development of capacity within the Plan area there
will be an ongoing reliance on capacity elsewhere. In Scenario 2 hazardous waste
grows at a slightly higher rate than in Scenario 1 and so the capacity gap increases
slightly.
Implications for Hazardous Waste
4.53 Leeds should continue regional cooperation for hazardous waste as it is entirely
usual, and acceptable, for hazardous waste management facilities to receive waste
from a wide catchment due to economies of scale, indeed this is recognised by
NPPW. Some formal acknowledgement within West Yorkshire of the strategic
patterns related to hazardous waste management and shared reliance on particular
facilities and areas would be helpful. It will also be necessary to monitor and confirm
the ongoing availability of management routes with host authorities.
4.54 The Plan should also provide in principle support for new hazardous waste
management capacity. For example, if a company proposes a new chemical waste
treatment plant or expansion of current one, planning policy should be favourable.
The Plan could also identify potential land within industrial areas if consultation
reveals market demand (e.g. chemical industry cluster).
Agricultural Waste
4.55 Agricultural waste production is relatively negligible (less than 1% of the total
waste produced). Slight growth in arisings is forecast by Scenario 2 (0.5% p.a.) to
3,269 t vs 2,900t baseline. The management profile aligns with C&I waste as that
which leaves farms for management will be of a similar composition. This results in
c2,500t to recycling, c700t to ‘EfW’, and negligible to landfill by 2042.
4.56 There are no dedicated agricultural waste facilities in Leeds, but related wastes
(e.g. farm plastics, machinery, packaging) usually enter C&I waste streams
(collected by contractors and taken to C&I waste facilities). Given the negligible level
of arisings this isn’t shown as needing separate bespoke capacity. No specific gap is
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 33 of 60
identified as the assumption is that this is managed within existing systems e.g. farm
waste like silage wrap goes to plastic recyclers via producer schemes, etc.
Summary of Surplus/Shortfall Against Requirements
4.57 From the above stream by stream analysis, the major capacity surpluses and
shortfalls for Leeds by 2042 can be summarised as follows:
Surpluses (capacity > requirement)
• Recycling capacity for LACW, C&I, and C&D waste. There are hundreds of
thousands of tonnes of extra capacity in these categories. This suggests no
new recycling facilities are needed; rather the focus is on maximising the use
of existing capacity.
• Other recovery capacity (Energy from Waste) for LACW, C&I (and by
extension some wood within the C&D waste stream). Significant surplus
exists. Non-landfill residual waste treatment infrastructure in Leeds is more
than adequate. Indeed Scenario 2 suggests the RERF could be only c50%
utilised for waste produced in Leeds by 2042, meaning a surplus capacity that
will likely be utilised by residual waste imported from elsewhere.
• Hazardous waste transfer capacity. This allows the collection and bulking of
hazardous waste for transportation beyond the Plan area for management.
• Composting. A theoretical surplus for composting is identified as the
requirement to meet recycling targets is modelled as being addressed by
existing recycling capacity. This masks the need for capacity to manage local
authority collected green and food waste though this may be met by capacity
beyond the Plan area.
Shortfalls (Gaps) (requirement > capacity)
• Inert excavation waste (beneficial deposit). This is by far the largest capacity
gap identified. There is a cumulative c11 to 12 million tonne shortfall over the
Plan period to 2042.
• Non-hazardous waste landfill (for residual LACW/C&I waste). There is no
capacity of this type within the Plan area. However, the annual requirement is
should decline over the Plan period (projected c15ktpa combined LACW +
C&I waste by 2042) which should be manageable via exports to strategic
facilities though confirmation of the quantum and availability of such capacity
should be obtained via Duty to Cooperate discussions with host authorities.
• Hazardous waste treatment. There is an estimated shortfall of c55ktpa.
Capacity within Leeds allows for management of c54% of its hazardous waste
with the remainder being managed elsewhere.
• Hazardous waste landfill. There is an estimated annual shortfall of c4ktpa with
100% reliance on capacity elsewhere.
• Excavation waste recycling. There is a moderate shortfall of c36ktpa if a level
of 5% recycling is assumed for example by soil washing. If on site reuse were
counted towards this target, then it may be achievable within the Plan area.
4.58 These findings reflect observations in the adopted NRWLP 2013 that while
there is plenty of treatment capacity for the main waste streams, there is little landfill
in the Plan area. The findings also align with traditional urban waste capacity
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 34 of 60
challenges relating to a lack of opportunities for landfill development and reliance on
a regional network, and hazardous waste requiring needing regional/national
management solutions.
4.59 Comparing the two scenarios shows that the differences between them are
quantitative and not qualitative. Both scenarios identify the same types of gaps and
surpluses e.g. inert waste to land and hazardous waste are gaps in both; recycling
and EfW surpluses in both. Scenario 2 (higher growth, higher recycling) results in
smaller surpluses and slightly larger gaps. For example, the inert waste to land gap
is greater by c0.9M tonne, the hazardous waste gap by c4ktpa and recycling
surpluses are smaller by around 10 to 15%. But broadly, the Plan needs are similar
in either case. The presence of surpluses in recycling/EfW capacity even under the
higher requirement scenario (2) suggests there is capacity resilience to high waste
growth and achieving higher recycling rates will not be limited by capacity.
4.60 In light of the above the suggested the strategy for future waste management
capacity in Leeds is:
- Maintain and optimise surpluses (ensure their capacity is fully utilised to
reduce the need for additional development)
- Address or mitigate shortfalls through planning policy, partnership, and
possibly new capacity where feasible (though some local shortfalls such as
landfill might be intentionally left to be addressed by capacity elsewhere).
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 35 of 60
5. Recommendations
5.1 The following recommendations suggest how identified capacity gaps and
surpluses might be addressed in the Local Plan. The recommendations cover
capacity planning, cross-boundary cooperation, policy directions, and monitoring and
are based on the above assessment of current and future waste management needs
in Leeds.
Addressing Capacity Gaps
Inert Excavation Waste Capacity
5.2 The analysis shows a very large shortfall in capacity for managing excavation
(inert) waste within Leeds. Alternative provisions for inert waste should be planned
for as follows:
• Regional Solutions. Proactively engage with neighbouring authorities (e.g.
Bradford, Wakefield, etc.) to ensure continued access to inert landfill and/or
recovery sites for excavation waste arising in Leeds. This could be through
Memorandums of Understanding (MoU) or Statements of Common Ground
(SoCG), under the Duty to Cooperate, which acknowledge that inert
excavation waste will be exported from urban Leeds to available void in the
region. Ideally this should be addressed at the combined authority level and
facilitated by WYCA.
• Local Opportunities. Investigate whether any new inert waste recovery
capacity can be created in Leeds. For example, if any quarries or large
construction voids might become available (even temporarily). Policy
supporting their development involving for inert waste placement could be
included in the Local Plan. There might be brownfield sites (low-lying land or
void spaces) where inert waste could be used beneficially (for example,
raising land for flood defence, or restoring derelict sites). The Council could
issue a call for sites and/or consult industry to identify whether any such
capacity can be realised.
• Development Management Policy. Policy should be included in the Plan
requiring large construction projects in Leeds to have robust Site Waste
Management Plans that maximise on-site reuse of excavated soils.
Encouraging developers to use the Definition of Waste: Code of Practice
(DoWCoP) will enable more spoil to be reused on other local sites without
needing disposal as ‘waste’. Utilising quarry voids for temporary soil storage
and reuse hubs may also facilitate the protection and reuse of soil which is an
acknowledged important resource. Local Plan policy can provide in principle
support for such activity.
Summary
5.3 The Local Plan should explicitly recognise and address the inert waste capacity
gap and include a policy commitment that Leeds will continue to rely on a network of
regional inert waste facilities, rather than trying to achieve self-sufficiency in inert
landfill capacity. This realistic, deliverable approach should be coupled with in
principle support for any proposals that do come forward for inert waste recycling or
recovery in Leeds.
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 36 of 60
Non-Hazardous Landfill (Residual Waste Disposal)
5.4 There is no non-hazardous landfill capacity in Leeds, but the need for landfill is
small and shrinking (aiming <10% of waste). Rather than seeking new landfill
capacity the following is recommended:
• Maintaining a Zero Waste to Landfill Strategy. Policies that direct residual
waste to energy recovery and other treatments and reserve landfill strictly for
unrecoverable fractions should be retained. The fact that there is no landfill in
Leeds should act as an incentive for industry to seek other management
solutions.
• Regional Agreement on Landfill. Work with neighbouring authorities to
acknowledge, via MoU or SoCG, that non-hazardous landfill capacity is a
strategic resource to be planned for on a cooperative basis, ideally facilitated
by WYCA. This may also be a matter that could usefully be considered in the
future Spatial Development Strategy for West Yorkshire.
• Policy Position. The Local Plan can include policy that no new non-hazardous
landfill capacity is proposed in Leeds due to adequate regional availability and
the objective to minimise landfill. This sets clear expectations for industry.
Only in exceptional circumstances (e.g. if regional capacity became critically
low) would this position be reconsidered.
Hazardous Waste Management
5.5 There will continued reliance on capacity beyond the Plan area to manage much
of the hazardous waste arising in Leeds which requires treatment and landfill.
• Duty to Cooperate on Hazardous Waste. The management of hazardous
waste needs to be included in discussions with local authorities with such
capacity in their area. For example, the Yorkshire and Humber Waste
Technical Advisory Body could coordinate a study that considers the
adequacy of hazardous waste infrastructure in the region. Leeds City Council
would contribute data on its hazardous waste exports (by type and
destination) and management capacity to support such a study.
• Support New Hazardous Waste Management Capacity. The Local Plan
should contain a policy that provide in principle support for proposals for new
or expanded hazardous waste management facilities in Leeds. For example, if
an operator wanted to build an oil recovery plant or an asbestos waste
transfer station in Leeds, policy should be welcoming (subject to normal
development management considerations).
• Safeguard Existing Capacity. Policy should be included in the Local Plan to
safeguard existing hazardous waste treatment (and transfer) capacity against
redevelopment for other uses and encroachment by incompatible
development that might hinder/prevent normal operations.
• Monitor Hazardous Waste Movements. Using EA data monitor where
hazardous waste from Leeds is being managed and establish the resilience of
the management routes. If facilities receiving hazardous waste from Leeds
are nearing capacity or closure (e.g. a hazardous landfill set to close by a
certain date), this should impact attitudes (and/or policy) towards granting
permission for proposals intended to provide alternative capacity. Again such
monitoring co-ordinated a regional level would be more helpful.
Organic Waste Treatment
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 37 of 60
5.6 While not highlighted as a specific numerical gap in capacity (due to recycling
capacity requirements being met via dry recycling), the lack of local composting/AD
capacity is an important matter for further consideration especially when separate
food waste collections from households are imminent.
• Encourage Local AD Capacity. While AD capacity beyond the Plan area may
be available for the management of food waste arising in Leeds, development
of local capacity would bring benefits to the area including the production of
energy and reductions in transport. The Plan should therefore offer in principle
support for the development of such capacity in the Plan area. The Plan could
so far as to identify broad locations where the development of such capacity
would be preferred. For example, co-locating an AD plant at Knostrop WWTW
or at sites operated by the Council. Ultimately the Plan could allocate land for
an organic waste treatment facility if a suitable site were to be
proposed/identified.
Utilising Surplus Capacity
5.7 The surplus recycling and other recovery capacity in Leeds presents an
opportunity for ongoing and future management of waste in Leeds.
• Safeguard Existing Facilities. As previously mentioned, the Local Plan should
identify and safeguard key waste management sites (MRFs, EfW, transfer
stations, C&D waste recycling sites, etc.) from encroachment or
redevelopment to non-waste uses. This will help ensure the surplus capacity
is maintained through to 2042. Such policy could specify that existing waste
capacity will be protected unless equivalent capacity is provided elsewhere.
• Maximise Throughput at Facilities. Local Plan policy should proposals
intended to help maximise use of available capacity.
• Regional Role. The authority should be open about how surplus capacity
within Leeds can be relied upon by other authorities seeking to meet
requirements for the management of waste in arising in their areas. While not
over-encouraging imports (which could conflict with proximity principle),
sharing capacity makes sense to avoid over-development. Duty to Cooperate
discussions should reflect how capacity in Leeds can be relied upon by
others.
• Future Flexibility. Surplus capacity provides headroom if waste grows faster
than expected or if capacity is lost. The Plan can highlight capacity surpluses
in Leeds as a strength that contributes to resilience of the wider waste
management network.
Engagement with Neighbouring Authorities
5.8 In light of cross-boundary movements associated with imports and exports of
waste, and their likely importance in future, Duty to Cooperate activity concerning on
waste planning is important for Leeds.
• Formalise Cooperation. Statements of Common Ground with relevant Waste
Planning Authorities should be prepared (or updated).
• Landfill provision. Hazardous waste management; Inert waste (coordination
with authorities that have quarry voids in their areas which could accept inert
waste from Leeds.
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 38 of 60
• West Yorkshire Coordination. Work with the West Yorkshire Combined
Authority and/or the Yorkshire and Humber Waste Technical Advisory Body
should be pursued with other authorities to collectively address capacity
issues. For example, West Yorkshire as a whole might plan to meet net selfsufficiency.
The City Council could champion a ‘West Yorkshire Waste
Position Statement’ to underpin local plans in the area, confirming how waste
will flow between areas and identifying any joint infrastructure needs.
• Notification and Monitoring. Request that neighbouring authorities consult
Leeds on planning applications for major new waste facilities or landfill
closures that could impact Leeds. Early knowledge of, say, a major regional
landfill closing in 5 years time would allow time to adjust the strategy.
5.9 By maintaining ongoing meaningful dialogue and establishing formal agreements
(expected in any case by the provisions of the DtC), risks associated with reliance on
external capacity can be mitigated. Similarly, willingness to allow reliance on waste
capacity surpluses in Leeds constitutes good planning and helps avoid overdevelopment.
Policy Implications for the Leeds Local Plan
5.10 As already indicated above, the findings of this WNA inform the approaches on
waste management to be taken in the new Local Plan as outlined below.
• Spatial Strategy. The Plan should articulate that net self-sufficiency will be
pursued for most waste streams (LACW, C&I, C&D) through existing capacity,
but will rely on regional facilities for landfill and specialist hazardous waste
management capacity. This transparent approach is consistent with the
NPPW that expects needs to be identified and acknowledgment where other
areas are to be relied upon to meet needs.
• Site Allocation. On the basis that there is no pressing need for new waste
management capacity (due to surpluses and resilience of exports (to be
confirmed)), allocation of land for waste management is unnecessary.
However, the Plan should allow for the possibility of development for capacity
for inert waste deposit on land, non-hazardous landfill (albeit in exceptional
circumstances) and hazardous waste. Allocation of an area within a suitable
industrial estate as ‘suitable for waste uses’ should be considered. In any
event allocation of industrial areas in the Local Plan should specify how well
suited they would be to accommodating waste management capacity
(especially for hazardous or organics).
• Development Management Policies. Criteria for assessing waste facility
proposals should be reviewed and updated. Such criteria should generally
support development associated with modernisation/intensification at existing
waste sites (to maximise the potential of existing sites). Temporary on-site
waste treatment during major construction projects (crushers, screeners on
development sites) should be supported in principle. Site Waste Management
Plans or Circular Economy Statements should be required to demonstrate
how waste will be minimised and recycled materials used on construction.
• Safeguarding Policy. As already noted a schedule of existing waste sites in
Leeds to which safeguarding policy applies should be included and
maintained.
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 39 of 60
• Promotion of Waste Hierarchy and Circular Economy. Local plan policies
should promote waste reduction and reuse initiatives in all forms of
development (not just waste). For example the Plan could encourage
provision of space for repair/reuse facilities in large developments (tying into
circular economy e.g. reuse shops at HWRCs, library of things etc.). The
London Plan provides an example of ambitious policy in this area.
• Climate Change Links. Policy should require utilisation of surplus heat from
EfW development. Improving recycling and reducing landfill contributes to
climate emergency goals in Leeds by cutting greenhouse gas emissions from
waste. The WNA’s assumptions on biodegradable waste diversion from
landfill (virtually none to landfill) align with climate objectives and so this could
be incorporated as targets within policy and/or monitoring.
5.11 By implementing such policies, the Local Plan will address the findings of this
WNA. Put simply, the Plan’s approach will be: ‘There is enough capacity of type X,
so this will be safeguarded; there is a lack capacity of type Y, and this will be met via
external cooperation and in principle support for any new proposals.’
Monitoring and Data Updates
5.12 To monitor the Plan and keep the WNA evidence up to date a robust monitoring
framework should be established as described below.
• Annual Monitoring Report (AMR). Annual waste management performance
should be reported against indicators including:
- Quantity of each waste stream arising (to check against forecasts);
- Percentage recycled/landfilled (to check progress against targets).
- Capacity changes (any new facilities opened/closed/expanded).
• 5 Yearly WNA Update. A full refresh of the Waste Needs Assessment should
take place at least every 5 years to align and inform, the review of the Local
Plan. A refresh may also be triggered by specific events such as a major
facility closing or the introduction of additional policy/legislation. A refresh
could assess the impact of new policies (like EPR/DRS).
• Operator Engagement. A periodic survey of waste facility operators in Leeds
to get additional insights may be beneficial. Information gleaned can feed into
future planning (and possibly prompt interventions if imminent capacity issues
are identified.
• Data Quality Improvements. Work with WYCA, the Environment Agency and
local authority officers to improve data on waste sites (to address data
gaps/misclassifications). For example, ensure clarity on how capacity is
attributed if a site handles multiple waste streams, to improve the accuracy of
future capacity assessments.
• Monitoring of Exports/Imports. Use WDI data to monitor how much waste is
exported to which authority and how much is imported. If an import/export
pattern shifts significantly e.g. landfill capacity is being exhausted, the Council
can proactively address it e.g. by finding alternative sites/options.
5.13 Through monitoring the Council can respond to changing patterns in
management and arisings e.g. if waste growth deviates (e.g. starts declining due to
dematerialisation or remote working, etc.), or if recycling stalls below target, the
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 40 of 60
Council may adjust its attitude to new development or potential plan for additional
capacity.
6. Summary
6.1 This Outline Waste Needs Assessment (WNA) provides a high level, strategic
assessment of the needs for waste management capacity to manage waste arising
in Leeds to 2042 to inform the content of the consultation draft (Regulation 18) of the
new Leeds Local Plan. Using the West Yorkshire Combined Authority (WYCA)
Waste Capacity Model as the principal data source, the assessment compared
baseline and projected waste arisings under two growth and management scenarios
with existing local capacity.
6.2 Key findings include the suggestion that Leeds is broadly self-sufficient in
recycling and other recovery, but there are ongoing deficits in landfill capacity, inert
waste to land capacity and hazardous waste management. The identified capacity
surpluses and gaps are consistent across both the median and maximum growth
scenarios, though the scale of surplus or shortfall varies depending on assumptions.
6.3 The assessment emphasises the importance of safeguarding existing capacity,
supporting new facilities where capacity gaps exist (particularly for organic waste
treatment and hazardous waste), and maintaining strong cross-boundary
cooperation, especially in relation to final disposal requirements.
6.4 The findings are indicative and based on high-level modelling rather than
detailed site-by-site analysis. The assumptions and limitations applied (including
reliance on permitted capacities, not actual throughput, and exclusion of
exempt/unpermitted waste streams) should be carefully noted.
6.5 If alternative assumptions were made, for example lower recycling performance,
faster-than-expected waste growth, or sudden changes in facility availability, then the
capacity gaps could widen, requiring more urgent policy responses. Ongoing
monitoring, review, and stakeholder engagement will be essential to maintain an up
to date picture of waste needs across the plan period. This document may be
updated in light of the consultation on the draft Leeds Local Plan.
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 41 of 60
Appendices
Appendix 1: Waste Arisings Data and Baseline Calculations
The following is a detailed breakdown of how 2017 West Yorkshire values were
apportioned to Leeds and updated to 2022.
Derivation of Factors for Estimating Waste Baseline Arisings
1. Population
Data source: ONS Mid-Year Population Estimates
Leeds proportion = Population of Leeds/Total Population of West Yorkshire
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/non-domestic-rating-stock-of-properties-includingbusiness-
floorspace-2023
As of recent mid-year estimates (2022–2023):
• Leeds: c812,000
• Bradford: c550,000
• Kirklees: c444,000
• Wakefield: c353,000
• Calderdale: c211,000
• West Yorkshire total: c2.37 million
So: 812,000/2,370,000 = c34.2%
Based on population data Leeds produces c34% of West Yorkshire’s total waste.
2. Number of Dwellings
Data source: ONS Household Estimates or MHCLG Live Table 100
Leeds proportion = Number of dwellings in Leeds/ Total number of dwellings in West
Yorkshire
As of 2023:
• Leeds: 363,395
• Bradford: 222,130
• Kirklees: 189,797
• Wakefield: 163,894
• Calderdale: 97,024
• West Yorkshire total = 1,036,240
So: 363,395/1,036,240 = 35.1%
Based on dwellings Leeds produces c35% of West Yorkshire’s total waste.
3. Employment
Data source: Nomis official labour market stats
Leeds proportion = Number of people in employed in Leeds/ Total number of people
employed in West Yorkshire
As of 2023–2024:
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 42 of 60
• Leeds: 368,000
• Bradford: 244,200
• Kirklees: 215,800
• Wakefield: 162,800
• Calderdale: 102,700
• West Yorkshire total = 1,093,500
So: 368,000/1,093,500 = 33.7%
Based on employment Leeds produces c34% of West Yorkshire’s total waste.
To be applied to C&I waste.
4. Gross Value Added (GVA)
Data Source: ONS, regional gross value added (income approach)8
Leeds proportion = GVA Leeds/Total GVA of West Yorkshire
As of 2017:
• Leeds: £23,407,000
• Bradford: £10,185,000
• Wakefield: £7,373,000
• Kirklees and Calderdale: £12,381,000
• West Yorkshire total = £53,346,000
So: £23,407,000/£53,346,000 = 43.9%
Based on GVA Leeds produces c44% of West Yorkshire’s total waste.
To be applied to C&I waste.
5. Business Count - Registered VAT/PAYE Businesses
Data source: ONS, UK business: activity, size and location
Leeds proportion = Registered VAT/PAYE Businesses/ Total Registered VAT/PAYE
Businesses in West Yorkshire
As of 2024:
• Leeds: 29,020
• Bradford: 16,510
• Kirklees: 15,385
• Wakefield: 9,930
• Calderdale: 8,090
• West Yorkshire total = 78,935
So: 29,020/78,935 = 36.8%
Based on Registered VAT/PAYE Businesses Leeds produces c36.8% of West
Yorkshire’s total waste.
6. Housing Completions
Data source: DLUHC Housing Live Tables or local planning authority AMRs
Leeds proportion = Housing completions in Leeds/ Total housing completions in West
Yorkshire.
As of 2023-2024:
• Leeds: 2170
• Bradford: 830
• Kirklees: 600
8 Table 1
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 43 of 60
• Wakefield: 720
• Calderdale: 260
• West Yorkshire total = 4580
So: 2170/4580 = 47.7%
Based on Housing Completions Leeds produces c48% of West Yorkshire’s total
waste.
To be applied to Construction, demolition and excavation (C,D&E) waste.
7. Business Floorspace
Data source: Non-domestic rating: stock of properties including business floorspace, 20239
Leeds proportion = Business floorpsace in Leeds/ Total business floorspace in West
Yorkshire.
As of 2023:
• Leeds: 8,963 km2
• Bradford: 6,106 km2
• Kirklees: 5,299 km2
• Wakefield: 5,064 km2
• Calderdale: 2,950 km2
• West Yorkshire total = 28,382 km2
So: 8,963/28,382 = 31.6%
Based on Business floorpsace Leeds produces c32% of West Yorkshire’s total
waste.
To be applied to Commercial and Industrial Waste (C&I) waste.
8. Total Land Area (hectares)
Data source: ONS Open Geography Portal10
Leeds proportion = Total land area of Leeds/ Total land area of West Yorkshire
As of 2023:
• Leeds: 552 km2
• Bradford: 366 km2
• Kirklees: 409 km2
• Wakefield: 339 km2
• Calderdale: 364 km2
• West Yorkshire total = 2030 km2
So: 552/2030 = 27.2%
Based on total land area Leeds produces c27.2% of West Yorkshire’s total waste.
9. Non-developed land11 use area
Data source: DLUHC land use statistics live tables12
9 NDR Business Floorspace Tables, 2023 -Table/sheet FS1.1
10
https://geoportal.statistics.gov.uk/datasets/e0e00383f27d4437ae87d26e673c2d54_0/explore?location
=53.451560%2C-0.712723%2C8.99
11 This includes agriculture, forest, open land and water, outdoor recreation and residential gardens.
12 Land use statistics: England 2022 - live tables - Sheet P400b
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 44 of 60
Leeds proportion = Leeds non-developed land use area/ Total non-developed land
use area of West Yorkshire
As of 2022:
• Leeds: 43,621 hectares
• Bradford: 29,892 hectares
• Kirklees: 34,517 hectares
• Wakefield: 27,481 hectares
• Calderdale: 32,742 hectares
• West Yorkshire total = 168,253 hectares
So: 43,621/168,253 = 25.9%
Based on non-developed land use area Leeds produces c25.9% of West Yorkshire’s
total waste.
10. Agricultural Land
Data source: DLUHC land use statistics live tables13
Leeds proportion = Leeds agricultural land area/ Total agricultural land area of West
Yorkshire.
As of 2022:
• Leeds: 24,321 hectares
• Bradford: 13,947 hectares
• Kirklees: 17,208 hectares
• Wakefield: 17,297 hectares
• Calderdale: 12,096 hectares
• West Yorkshire total = 84,869 hectares
So: 24,321/ 84,869 = 28.7%
Based on agricultural land area Leeds produces c29% of West Yorkshire’s total
waste.
13 Land use statistics: England 2022 - live tables - Sheet P400b
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 45 of 60
Appendix 2: Waste Management Facilities in Leeds (Source WYCA database)
Site Name Operator Facility Type
Capacity
(tpa)
53 Pontefract Road EML Metal Recycling 2,500
Acanthus Golf Centre
Oakland Golf &
Leisure Ltd
Deposit of waste to
land (recovery) 137,266
Aireborough Waste
Traders
Mr Mark Paul
Sandham & Mr
Terence George
Sandham
Non-HazWaste
Transfer 1,734
Arthington Quarry
Physical Treatment 2
Associated
Waste
Management Ltd Physical Treatment 9,442
Arthington Quarry, Land
Recovery
Associated
Waste
Management Ltd
Deposit of waste to
land (recovery) 113,330
Arthington Quarry,
Physical Treatment 1
Associated
Waste
Management Ltd Physical Treatment 1,254
Asbestos Store
Leeds City
Council Haz Waste Transfer 562
Asbestos Waste Transfer
Station
Aspect Contracts
Ltd Haz Waste Transfer 200
AWM Ltd, Skelton
Grange Road, Stourton,
Leeds AWM Ltd
Material Recycling
Facility 0
B W Skip Hire
B W Skip Hire
Ltd
Vehicle Depollution
Facility 68,002
Babington Car Spares Mr Leon Parrish Car Breaker 2,380
Bagnall & Morris Skelton
Grange MRF
Bagnall & Morris
(Waste Services)
Ltd
Material Recycling
Facility 75,000
Beechgrove Farm,
Wetherby Road,
Scarcroft, TD Goodall Energy from waste 1,000
Betta Skip Hire
Mr Philip
Metcalfe
Non-Haz Waste
Transfer 116
Bill Dyson Skip Hire
Robert William
Dyson
Non-Haz Waste
Transfer 11,766
Blackhill Quarry
Mone Brothers
Ltd Landfill (inert) 8,003
Brancepeth Place
D L R Holdings
Ltd
Physical-Chemical
Treatment 3,180
Britannia Quarry
Booth Ventures
Ltd Landfill (inert) 46,914
Britannia Quarry
EPR/LP3133FK
Booth Ventures
Ltd
Landfill (nonhazardous)
257,154
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 46 of 60
Site Name Operator Facility Type
Capacity
(tpa)
Brown Lane Beeston S&W Paper
Material Recycling
Facility 0
Capitol Garage Richard Dolan
Vehicle Depollution
Facility 103
Carr Crofts Site
Associated
Waste
Management Ltd
Material Recycling
Facility 73,680
Chartist Way
Rentokil Initial U
K Ltd
Clinical Waste
Transfer 1,482
Cross Green Autos 1997 John Eastwood C a r B r eaker 214
Cross Green Industrial
Estate Energy Recovery
Facility
Veolia ES Leeds
Ltd Energy from waste 200,000
Cross Green Industrial
Estate Mechanical Pre-
Treatment Facility Veolia Residual MRF 214,000
Cross Myrtle Street Motorhog Metal Recycling 1,000
Dixons Car Dismantlers
Ltd Mr Paul Dixon Car Breaker 552
East Leeds Household
Waste Sorting Site, CA
site
Leeds City
Council CA Site 12,732
East Leeds Household
Waste Sorting Site, Non-
Haz Transfer
Leeds City
Council
Non-Haz Waste
Transfer 4,158
Ellar Ghyll Site
Leeds City
Council CA Site 4,924
European Metal
Recycling
European Metal
Recycling Ltd Metal Recycling 95,226
Fireclay
Mone Brothers
Excavations Ltd Physical Treatment 228,325
gelderd road Biffa
Non-Haz Waste
Transfer 2,500
Grangefield Industrial
Estate, Richardshaw
Road, Stanningley,
Pudsey BW Skip Hire
Material Recycling
Facility 75,000
H W Martin Waste Ltd
H W Martin
Waste Ltd
Non-Haz Waste
Transfer/Treatment 66,465
Haigh Park Road, Sturton JM Haulage
Recycling
(aggregates, other C
and D) 75,000
Halfway Garage Ltd
Halfway Garage
( Robin Hood )
Ltd Car Breaker 1,073
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 47 of 60
Site Name Operator Facility Type
Capacity
(tpa)
Holmewell Road Sorting
Site
Leeds City
Council
Material Recycling
Facility 11,283
Howley Park Quarry
Phase 3
Moorhead
Excavations Ltd
Deposit of waste to
land (recovery) 65,630
Howley Park Road East,
Morley Booth Ventures
Recycling
(aggregates, other
C&D) 30,000
Hub 45
OCO Technology
Ltd & Carbon8
Aggregates Ltd
Recycling
(aggregates, other
C&D) 120,000
J Alderson And Son
John Alderson
And Son Ltd Haz Waste Transfer 148
J Murphy & Son Shaun Murphy P h y s i c a l Treatment 960
J W Hinchliffe Ltd
J W Hinchliffe
Ltd Haz Waste Transfer 7
Kirkstall H W S S,
Material Recycling
Leeds City
Council
Material Recycling
Facility 107
Kirkstall H W S S, Non-
Haz Waste Transfer
Leeds City
Council
Non-Haz Waste
Transfer 21,988
Knostrop Wastewater
Treatment Works
Yorkshire Water
Services Ltd Composting 40,363
Knostrop Waste
Treatment Facility,
Chemical Treatment
FCC Recycling
(UK) Ltd Chemical Treatment 259,380
Knostrop Waste
Treatment Facility,
Incineration without
energy recovery
FCC Recycling
(UK) Ltd
Incineration without
Energy Recovery 10,000
Knostrop Waste
Water/Sludge Treatment Yorkshire Water Treatment Facility 12,000
Knowsthorpe Way
Transfer Station Skelton Ltd
Material Recycling
Facility 69,580
L S S Waste
Management Ltd
L S S Waste
Management Ltd
Non-Haz Waste
Transfer 176,829
Land Regeneration
Management Ltd
Land
Regeneration
Management Ltd
Deposit of waste to
land (recovery) 27,675
Leeds M R F \ H W S
Leeds City
Council CA Site 7,859
Leeds Recycling
Tarmac Trading
Ltd
Inert Waste Transfer /
Treatment 31,424
Leeds RERF
Veolia ES Leeds
Ltd
Non-Haz Waste
Transfer 23,942
Lemonroyd Sludge
Treatment Facility
Yorkshire Water
Services Ltd
Physical-Chemical
Treatment 52,124
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 48 of 60
Site Name Operator Facility Type
Capacity
(tpa)
Mc Gregors Yard
Mc Gregor Bros.
Ltd Car Breaker 304
Meanwood Road H W S
Leeds City
Council CA Site 9,691
Milners Road Site, CA
site
Leeds City
Council CA Site 7,479
Milners Road Site, Non-
Haz waste transfer
S B T
Contracting Ltd
Non-Haz Waste
Transfer 24,521
Milners Road, Yeadon,
Leeds Ls19 7je
Mark
Waddington
Non-Haz Waste
Transfer 2,341
Moor Road
Robinson And
Birdsell
(Recycling) Ltd Metal Recycling 762
Moor Top Quarry RG Stone Landfill (inert)
Morley Waste Traders
Ltd, LS27 7JU
Morley Waste
Traders Ltd Metal Recycling 9,248
Morley Waste Traders,
LS27 8RU
Morley Waste
Traders Ltd Metal Recycling
No Name, Land Between
Ready Mix Site And
Cross Green Investments
Ltd, Knowsthorpe Road,
Leeds Infinity Metals Metal Recycling 75,000
Odda Quarry Ogden Estates Landfill (inert)
P H S Ltd
Personnel
Hygiene
Services Ltd
Clinical Waste
Transfer 624
Peckfield Landfill
EPR/BU9726IH
Caird Peckfield
Ltd
Landfill (nonhazardous)
Pepper Road
Morley Waste
Traders Ltd Metal Recycling 18,443
Pudsey Grangefield
Sorting Site
Leeds City
Council
Non-Haz Waste
Transfer 7,829
Ravell Drum Works Packcare Ltd
Physical-Chemical
Treatment 6,717
Red Hall Lane
Leeds Council
Parks and
Gardens dept Composting
Regain Polymers Ltd
Regain Polymers
Ltd
Material Recycling
Facility 50,224
Rhodar Rhodar Ltd Haz Waste Transfer 374
Robinson And Birdsall
Robinson And
Birdsell Ltd Metal Recycling 2,978
S R C L Leeds Clinical
Waste Facility S R C L Ltd
Physical-Chemical
Treatment 3,319
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 49 of 60
Site Name Operator Facility Type
Capacity
(tpa)
Skelton Grange Energy
from Waste
WTI EFW
Holdings Ltd Energy from waste 410,100
Skelton Grange Landfill
Site, Composting Facility
Biffa Waste
Management Ltd Composting 24,000
Skelton Grange Landfill
Site, Inert LF Biogene Landfill (inert)
Skelton Grange Landfill
Site, Non-Haz waste
transfer
Biffa Waste
Services Ltd
Non-Haz Waste
Transfer/Treatment
Skelton MRF,
Knowsthorpe Way Skelton Ltd Energy from waste 24,000
Springwell Road
Biffa Waste
Services
Non-Haz Waste
Transfer 60,000
St Bernards Mill M R F
Associated
Waste
Management Ltd
Material Recycling
Facility 172,033
Swillington Quarry
Forterra Building
Products Landfill (Inert)
T A Brotherton
Thomas Arthur
Brotherton
Vehicle Depollution
Facility 4,055
T Shea Ltd
Green North
East Trading
Bidco Ltd Physical Treatment 183,695
Tate Medical Engineering
Ltd.
Tate Medical
Engineering Ltd
Physical-Chemical
Treatment 15,895
The Drum Yard
O' Donovan
Clifford
Physical-Chemical
Treatment 263
The Sidings
Jeff Skinner Skip
Hire Ltd
Non-Haz Waste
Transfer 18,084
Thorp Arch Sorting Site
Leeds City
Council CA Site 4,532
Thorpe Lane Site A1 All Cars Ltd Car Breaker 475
Timberpak Timberpak Ltd Physical Treatment 110,513
Town Street Site
Garage Revamps
Ltd Haz Waste Transfer 88
Tyersal Avenue Transfer
Station
Mr Joseph
Stephenson, Mrs
Betty
Stephenson & Mr
Geoffrey
Stephenson
Non-Haz Waste
Transfer 2,906
Unilever U K Unilever U K Ltd Physical Treatment 579
Valley Farm Road,
Stourton TBC
Non-Haz Waste
Transfer/Treatment 140,000
Valley House
EPR/XP3892ZH WasteCare Ltd Physical Treatment 29,650
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 50 of 60
Site Name Operator Facility Type
Capacity
(tpa)
Vickersdale Works
Metal Sourcing
Ltd Metal Recycling 8,831
Wetherby Skip Services
Wetherby Skip
Services Ltd
Non-Haz Waste
Transfer 23,486
Whitehall Road Goods
Yard, Holbeck
Biffa Waste
Services
Material Recycling
Facility 60,000
Whiteways Site Gary White C a r B reaker 217
Whitewell Farm,
Bramham TBC Composting 1,976
Windmill Gate Works (
Premier Metals)
M & N
Commodities Ltd Metal Recycling 1,666
Woodland Spares Ltd
Woodland
Spares Ltd
Vehicle Depollution
Facility 46
Y M T
Yorkshire Metal
Traders Ltd
Non-Haz Waste
Transfer 4,912
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 51 of 60
Appendix 3: Growth Rate Derivations
WYCA Database average growth from 2017 to 2036 for different waste types is set
out in the table below.
Waste Stream
Median Growth Maximum
Growth
AGR 0.00% 0.00%
C&I 0.33% 0.71%
CD 0.33% 0.71%
E 0.33% 0.71%
Haz 0.33% 0.71%
LACW Secondary 0.24% 0.48%
LACWHH 0.24% 0.48%
LACWNHH 0.24% 0.48%
Two sets of growth rates have been derived as follows:
1. Median Growth Rate Scenario
The median growth rates for Agricultural, C&I and hazardous waste have been
chosen to reflect recent events that are likely to have affected growth in waste
including:
- Covid
- Economic pressures – virtually stagnant economic growth experienced in the
recent past and predicted in future
- Increases (and increasing) costs of raw materials
The production of C, D & E waste fluctuates depending on construction activity
taking place in any one year. Planning Practice Guidance advises that a zero-growth
assumption (static growth) be used when forecasting and so this has been used for
the median growth rate scenario.
Growth rates for Local Authority Collected Waste are based on recent patterns14 and
future Government initiatives and targets aimed at reducing LACW arisings,
including:
- Recycle 65% of municipal (including household) waste by 2035
- Eliminate all avoidable waste by 2050 and all avoidable plastic waste by end
of 2042
- Double resource productivity by 2050
- Halve food waste by 2030 (from 2007 levels)
- Bans on certain single-use plastics
- Mandatory food waste collections (expected across England by 2026)
- Extended producer responsibility (EPR)
14 https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/local-authority-collected-waste-management-annualresults
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 52 of 60
- Halve residual household waste (excluding major mineral wastes) produced
per person by 2042
Historic Growth rates for LACW15 are as follows:
2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24
-0.49% 2.18% 2.29% -1.4% -4.97% 0.75% 5.09% 1.34% TBC 3.26%
The average growth rate over this period = 0.90%
If the anomalous Covid year (2020/21) is removed the average growth rate = 0.37%
0.37% has been taken as the LACW growth rate.
The median growth rates are consistent with trends reported in the 2022/23 Leeds
Authority Monitoring Report that states:
‘The total amount of waste received in Leeds increased by 8% from last year, with
small increases being seen in all waste streams. There is an apparent trend of
increasing waste being received in Leeds over the short term after decreases being
reported between 2016 and 2018, with a longer term trend also seeing slight
increases in waste being received from 2012 levels (Chart MW4).
The largest waste streams were for CD&E and C&I. 89% of this C&I waste consisted
of waste and water treatment, with the majority of this (81%) of this falling under the
'Mechanical treatment of waste (for example sorting - crushing - compacting -
pelletising)' sub-category.
All waste streams were below the waste arising projections in the Local Plan up to
2026, with the exception of MSW which was 141% above the projected waste figure.
MSW has risen each year since 2018, exceeding the projected figure since 2020.’
2. Maximum Growth Rate Scenario
The maximum growth rates chosen with explanation are set out in the table below:
Waste
Stream
Maximum
Growth
Rate
Justification
AGR 0.5%
In line with C&I growth to reflect increase in commercial
activity anticipated by the C&I growth rate
C&I 0.5%
While the WYCA model uses 0.71% as the maximum
growth rate this is considered excessive in light of recent
forecasts of economic growth in the UK
CD 0.33%
PPG recommends 0% for C, D & E waste and this has
been applied to the median growth rate. It is considered
that maximum growth rate for CD&E waste should be
greater than zero and so the WYCA median growth rate
for C,D&E of 0.33% and this has been chosen.
E 0.33% See above
Haz 0.5% To reflect the C&I maximum growth rate
15 Source data: Leeds Authority Monitoring Report 2022/23 and DEFRA for 2023/24
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 53 of 60
LACW 0.4%
The median growth rate has been taken as 0.37% which
reflects measured growth over recent years. Due to
Government initiatives to reduce LACW growth it is
possible that LACW reduces rather than increases and
so a maximum growth rate of 0.4% is proposed which is
only a modest increase on the median growth rate.
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 54 of 60
Appendix 4: Waste Management Profiles and Targets
A4.1 Context
A4.1.1 National policy
Municipal Waste
The UK government has committed to meet the following targets for the
management of municipal waste in England:
- Minimum 55% recycling floor by 2025;
- Minimum 60% recycling floor by 2030;
- Minimum 65% recycling floor by 2035;
- Maximum 10% on landfilling by 2035.
Commercial and Industrial Waste
There are no national policy targets addressing the management of C&I waste alone.
However, a number of policy targets concerning the management, and prevention, of
waste have been adopted by Government, which are relevant when considering
future need for management capacity for C&I waste. These are summarised below:
- A stated intention to achieve the virtual elimination of biodegradable waste
going to landfill from 2028;
- adoption of municipal waste recycling targets for 2025, 2030 and 2035 (see
above);
- adoption of a residual waste reduction target such that it does not exceed 287
kg per capita per year [from 2019 levels] by 31 December 2042 which is
supported by the following interim targets to be achieved by 31 January 2028:
- Reduce residual waste produced per person by 24%;
- reduce residual waste in total tonnes by 21%;
- reduce municipal residual waste produced per person by 29%; and,
- adoption of a long-term target for the virtual elimination of avoidable waste by
2050.
The residual waste reduction targets set out above are expected to be achieved
through a combination of increased recycling rates and waste prevention measures.
Government modelling has shown recycling rates may need to reach 75% by 2042.
This is expected to be achieved by the introduction of Extended Producer
Responsibility initiatives including a deposit return scheme relating to packaging
waste, and the adoption of a more consistent approach to recycling involving the
statutory requirement for the separate collection of at least five materials: glass,
metals, plastics, paper, and food waste from all households and business premises
by 2028.
Construction and Demolition Waste
Under the EU Waste Framework Directive, the UK was required to recover at least
70% of non-hazardous C&D waste by 2020. England surpassed this target,
achieving a recovery rate of 93.8% in 201816.
16 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/progress-report-on-recycling-and-recovery-targets-forengland-
2020
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 55 of 60
A4.1.2 Adopted Leeds NRWLP
Paragraph 4.14 states:
‘The additional capacity required to meet the needs of the plan (as shown in table
4.1), is based on achieving the following re-use, recycling and composting targets
which our evidence has shown are achievable in Leeds during the plan period17:
- 50% for MSW;
- 70% for C&I; and
- 70 - 85% for CD&E.’
A4.2 Proposed Targets
Two sets of targets have been derived, the principal difference between the two sets
is that one set is driven by achievement of the municipal waste recycling targets and
the other is driven by achievement of the 2042 residual waste per head target of
287kg. Their derivation is described below.
Target Scenario 1 – Government Recycling Target Lead
A4.2.1 Local Authority Collected Waste
The 2022/23 Authority Monitoring Report states that 61% of LACW was treated
through incineration with energy recovery, 37% was recycled and just under 1% was
sent to landfill.
Recycling/composting
It is assumed that by 2042 the 2035 65% recycling target will be achieved.
Landfill
There is no reason why landfilling rates should increase and so it is proposed that
the landfill rate of 1% be maintained.
Other Recovery (Energy from Waste)
This is the remainder between recycling and landfill with equates to 34%. This is a
drop from the most recent recorded rate, and it is assumed that any other recovery
capacity that would not be required for LACW would be utilised for other waste
streams.
A4.2.2 Commercial and Industrial Waste targets
Recycling/composting
The adopted Leeds NRWLP includes a target of 70% recycling/composting by 2026.
This target was an ambitious target at the time, however it is assumed national
initiatives (as described above) will result in a further increase in recycling and
composting and therefore a target of 75% by 2042 is proposed.
17 To 2026
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 56 of 60
Landfill
There is no convincing reason why the rate of landfilling of C&I waste should diverge
significantly from the 1% rate for LACW and so a similar 1% is proposed for C&I
waste for the end of the plan period.
Other Recovery (Energy from Waste)
If 75% is recycled and composted and 1% is landfilled, then the percentage of waste
being managed by other recovery will be 24%.
A4.2.3 Construction and Demolition Waste
Under the EU Waste Framework Directive, the UK was required to recover at least
70% of non-hazardous C&D waste by 2020. England surpassed this target,
achieving a recovery rate of 93.8% in 201818.
Recycling/composting
In light of the above it is reasonable to assume that a recycling rate for C&D waste of
95% could be achieved by 2042
Landfill
Very little C&D waste should need to go to landfill and so a rate of 1% by 2042 is
assumed consistent with LACW and C&I waste.
Other Recovery (Energy from Waste)
If 95% is recycled and composted and 1% is landfilled, then the percentage of waste
being managed by other recovery will be 4%.
A4.2.4 Excavation Waste
Excavation waste comprises mainly soils and stones. Soils can be recovered in
engineering operations and harder materials can be used a recycled aggregate. The
bulk of excavation waste is soils and so it is assumed that 95% will be recovered to
land and 55 will be recycled. There is no need for any such waste to be disposed
within landfill. The use of excavation waste in landfill engineering is taken to
constitute ‘other recovery’.
Recycling/composting = 5%
Landfill = 0%
Other Recovery (beneficial use via deposit on land) = 95%
A4.2.5 Hazardous Waste
Recycling/composting
Hazardous waste does not generally readily lend itself to recycling and composting
however some hazardous wastes can be recycled such as oils and solvents. Such
wastes will constitute quite a high proportion of the total hazardous waste arising and
so a rate of 75% has been assumed.
18 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/progress-report-on-recycling-and-recovery-targets-forengland-
2020
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 57 of 60
Landfill
For some hazardous waste landfill is the best option though other solutions further
up the waste hierarchy are preferable. Such wastes include asbestos although
arisings of such waste are declining. A rate of 5% has been assumed.
Other Recovery (Energy from Waste)
Incineration offers a solution for several types of hazardous waste and in some case
specialist high temperature units are deployed.
If 75% is recycled and 5% is landfilled, then the percentage of waste being managed
by other recovery will be 20%.
The management profile for this scenario is summarised in the table below:
Waste
Stream
Recycling
(%)
Non haz
Energy
from
Waste
(%)
Beneficial
use (%)
Non Haz
Landfill
(%)
Haz
waste
treatment
(%)
Haz
waste
landfill
(%)
AGR 75% 24% 0% 1% 0% 0%
C&I 75% 24% 0% 1% 0% 0%
CD 95% 4% 0% 1% 0% 0%
E 5% 0% 95% 0% 0% 0%
Haz 0% 0% 0% 0% 95% 5%
LACW 65% 34% 0% 1% 0% 0%
Target Scenario 2 – Government Residual Waste Target Lead
• This scenario takes account of the target in the Environmental Targets
(Residual Waste) (England) Regulations 2023 that includes a target of
reducing residual waste production to 287 kg per capita by 2042.
• According to the Office for National Statistics (ONS)19, the estimated
population of Leeds was 812,000 in 2021.
• Residual waste production in Leeds in 2021 was calculated using the Waste
Data Interrogator and found to equate to 521,088 tonnes which equates to
642kg per person. It is notable that this is significantly above the average for
England which the latest data suggests is 558kg/head (excluding major
mineral wastes)20.
19 https://www.ons.gov.uk/visualisations/censusareachanges/E08000035
20 https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/estimates-of-residual-waste-excluding-major-mineralwastes-
and-municipal-residual-waste-in-england/estimates-of-residual-waste-excluding-majormineral-
wastes-and-municipal-residual-waste-in-england
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 58 of 60
• England's population is projected to grow more quickly than other UK nations
between mid-2022 and mid-2032: by 7.8%21. This equates to 0.75% per year.
• It should be noted that the 287kg/person cap is more ambitious and long-term
and limits how much residual waste is generated regardless of how it's treated
(landfill, EfW, RDF, etc.).
• In this scenario it is assumed that there will be a linear reduction from 642kg
per person in 2021 to achieve the 287kg/head target in 2042.
• The scenario is lead by the reduction in residual waste target and does not
‘overlay’ additional recycling targets.
• The table below shows how the factors considered above result in an
estimate of annual residual waste arisings in Leeds between 2021 and 2042.
Year
Population
% Pop’n
increase
total residual
waste (t)
Residual
waste
kg/person
2021 812,000 0.75 521,088 642
2022 818,090 0.75 511,177 625
2023 824,226 0.75 501,088 608
2024 830,407 0.75 490,819 591
2025 836,635 0.75 480,367 574
2026 842,910 0.75 469,732 557
2027 849,232 0.75 458,909 540
2028 855,601 0.75 447,898 523
2029 862,018 0.75 436,696 507
2030 868,483 0.75 425,301 490
2031 874,997 0.75 413,710 473
2032 881,560 0.75 401,921 456
2033 888,171 0.75 389,933 439
2034 894,832 0.75 377,742 422
2035 901,544 0.75 365,346 405
2036 908,305 0.75 352,743 388
2037 915,118 0.75 339,930 371
2038 921,981 0.75 326,905 355
2039 928,896 0.75 313,666 338
2040 935,863 0.75 300,210 321
2041 942,882 0.75 286,534 304
2042 949,953 0.75 272,637 287
21https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationprojectio
ns/bulletins/nationalpopulationprojections/2022based
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 59 of 60
Assuming a 1% rate of landfill at 2042 allowed calculation of an ‘other recovery’
(assumed to be Energy from Waste) rate of 20% at 2042 and hence a recycling rate
of 79%. This assumes that the reduction in residual waste is wholly due to increases
in recycling and not due to other measures such as reduction in waste produced
overall.
For excavation and hazardous waste, the same management profile used in
Scenario 1 was used.
The management profile for this scenario is summarised in the table below:
Waste
Stream
Recycling
(%)
Non haz
Energy
from
Waste
(%)
Beneficial
use (%)
Non Haz
Landfill
(%)
Haz
waste
treatment
(%)
Haz
waste
landfill
(%)
AGR 79% 20% 0% 1% 0% 0%
C&I 79% 20% 0% 1% 0% 0%
CD 95% 4% 0% 1% 0% 0%
E 0% 0% 100% 0% 0% 0%
Haz 0% 0% 0% 0% 95% 5%
LACW 79% 20% 0% 1% 0% 0%
Outline Waste Needs Assessment (2025 - 2042)
Version: 2.0 Final Draft
16 June 2025
Page 60 of 60
Appendix 5: Glossary of Terms
Term Definition
AD Anaerobic Digestion – a biological process that breaks down
organic material to produce biogas and digestate.
C&I Waste Commercial and Industrial Waste – waste generated by
businesses and industry.
CD&E
Waste
Construction, Demolition and Excavation Waste – waste from
building, demolition, and excavation works.
Capacity
Gap
The difference between forecast waste arisings and the available
management capacity.
EA Environment Agency – the environmental regulator for England
responsible for permitting and monitoring waste sites.
EfW Energy from Waste – facilities that recover energy through
combustion or other thermal treatments.
Energy
Recovery
The conversion of non-recyclable waste materials into usable
heat, electricity, or fuel.
Hazardous
Waste
Waste that poses substantial or potential threats to public health
or the environment.
LACW Local Authority Collected Waste – waste collected by or on
behalf of local councils.
Landfill The disposal of waste on land, usually by burial in voids, typically
used for residual waste that cannot be recycled or recovered.
MRF Materials Recovery Facility – a plant where mixed recyclables
are separated and processed for recycling.
Recycling The process of converting waste materials into new materials
and objects.
Regulation
18
An early stage in Local Plan preparation where the draft plan is
consulted on publicly.
RERF Recycling and Energy Recovery Facility
TS Transfer Station – a site where waste is temporarily held before
transport to final disposal or treatment.
WDI Waste Data Interrogator – an Environment Agency dataset
recording waste movements and management.
WNA Waste Needs Assessment – a study assessing current and
future waste management requirements.
WYCA West Yorkshire Combined Authority – the regional authority
providing the waste capacity model used in this assessment.
Contents
Sheet Title Contents
2 Updates
This sheets outilines updates made by different
versions
3 Baselines How arisings baselines have been calculated
4
Waste growth rates dervied from the
WYCA Capacity Model
5 Forecast waste arisings to 2042
6 Management Profiles
shows percentage management of different waste
types
7 Future management requirements
Calculation of annual management requirements by
waste type and year. Includes cumulative total
deposit on land requirements.
8 Existing Management Capacity
9 Capacity Gaps at 2042
10 Raw LACW data
Updates
16.06.25 Comparable data on arisings from the NR&WLP 2013 added
16.06.25 Forecasts (sheet 5) updated to take account of the Plan period to 2042 (previous version was to 2041)
16.06.25 Management Profile (Sheet 6) updated to take account of the Plan period to 2042 (previous version was to 2041)
16.06.25 Management Profile (Sheet 6) updated to take account of the Plan period to 2042 (previous version was to 2041)
Waste Arising from WYCA Model for 2017 Baseline
West Yorks Leeds
2017 (West Yorks) % Leeds tonnage Tonnage Rounded Tonnage CDE %
AGR 10,261 28.70% 2,945 2,900 AGR 2,900 0.1
C&I 2,472,581 36.80% 909,910 909,900 C&I 909,900 39.7
CD 571,447 47.70% 272,580 272,500 C&D 272,500
E 1,480,248 47.70% 706,078 706,100 E 706,100 978,600 42.7
Haz 208,731 36.80% 76,813 76,800 Haz 76,800 3.4
LACW N/A N/A 323,059 323,100 LACW 323,100 14.1
2,291,300 2,291,300 100.0
LACW 2022/23
Mgt Method Leeds
Landfilled Waste
(tonnes) 2,404
Incineration with
EfW (tonnes) 200,796
Incineration without
EfW (tonnes) 1,937
Recycled-
Composted Waste
(tonnes) 116,234
Other waste
(tonnes) 1,688
Waste input to
intermediate plants
(tonnes) 213,713 323,059
Total 536,772
0%
40%
12%
31%
3%
14%
WASTE ARISINGS PROPORTIONS
AGR C&I C&D E Haz LACW
Comparison v Adopted Natural Resources and Waste Local Plan 2013
Current
(2011)
Current
(2011) %
2026
Projection %
975,364 975,364 35% 1,212,000 38% 40
1,405,000 1,405,000 50% 1,556,000 48% 43
92,974 92,974 3% 103,026 3% 3
347,725 347,725 12% 347,725 11% 14
2,821,063 2,821,063 3,218,751
Waste Stream 2017 2018 Growth tpa% Growth 2019 Growth tpa% Growth 2020 Growth tpa% Growth 2021
Growth
tpa
%
Growth
AGR 10261 10261 0 0.00% 10261 0 0.00% 10261 0 0.00% 10,261 0 0.00%
C&I 2489129 2495381 6252 0.25% 2502396 7015 0.28% 2509793 7397 0.30% 2,518,517 8,724 0.35%
CD 575272 576716 1444 0.25% 578338 1622 0.28% 580047 1709 0.30% 582,063 2,016 0.35%
E 1490155 1493898 3743 0.25% 1498097 4199 0.28% 1502526 4429 0.30% 1,507,748 5,222 0.35%
Haz 210128 210656 528 0.25% 211248 592 0.28% 211872 624 0.30% 212,609 737 0.35%
LACW Secondary 522752 524270 1518 0.29% 525704 1434 0.27% 527078 1374 0.26% 528,393 1,315 0.25%
LACWHH 922562 925241 2679 0.29% 927772 2531 0.27% 930198 2426 0.26% 932,518 2,320 0.25%
LACWNHH 10591 10622 31 0.29% 10651 29 0.27% 10679 28 0.26% 10,706 27 0.25%
Waste Stream 2017 2018 Growth tpa% Growth 2019 Growth tpa% Growth 2020 Growth tpa% Growth 2021 Growth t%pa Growth
AGR 10261 10261 12588 0.50% 10261 14157 0.56% 10261 14973 0.59% 10261 17708 0.70%
C&I 2505727 2518315 2910 0.50% 2532472 3272 0.56% 2547445 3460 0.59% 2565153 4093 0.70%
CD 579107 582017 7536 0.50% 585289 8476 0.56% 588749 8964 0.59% 592842 10601 0.70%
E 1500091 1507627 1063 0.50% 1516103 1195 0.56% 1525067 1264 0.59% 1535668 1495 0.70%
Haz 211529 212592 3055 0.58% 213787 2894 0.55% 215051 2781 0.52% 216546 2667 0.50%
LACW Secondary 525936 528991 5390 0.58% 531885 5109 0.55% 534666 4908 0.52% 537333 4706 0.50%
LACWHH 928182 933572 62 0.58% 938681 58 0.54% 943589 57 0.53% 948295 54 0.50%
LACWNHH 10656 10718 62 0.58% 10776 58 0.54% 10833 57 0.53% 10887 54 0.50%
LACW 2013/14 2014/15 change (t)
Change
(%) 2015/16 change (t) Change (%) 2016/17 change (t) Change (%) 2017/18
change
(t)
Change
(%)
total household
waste 305,359 305,618 259 0.08% 309,163 3,545 1.16% 314,931 5,768 1.87% 306,024 -8,907 -2.83%
LACW Source AMR
22/23 325,572 323,965 -1,607 -0.49% 331,043 7,078 2.18% 338,630 7,587 2.29% 333,895 -4,735 -1.40%
WYCA Growth Rates - Maximum
Growth
WYCA Growth Rates - baseline
Waste Stream
AGR
C&I
CD
E
Haz
LACW Secondary
LACWHH
LACWNHH
Waste Stream
AGR
C&I
CD
E
Haz
LACW Secondary
LACWHH
LACWNHH
LACW
total household
waste
LACW Source AMR
22/23
WYCA Growth Rates - Maximum
Growth
WYCA Growth Rates - baseline
2022
Growth
tpa
%
Growth 2023
Growth
tpa
%
Growth 2024
Growth
tpa
%
Growth 2025
Growth
tpa
%
Growth 2026
Growth
tpa
%
Growth
10261 0 0.00% 10261 0 0.00% 10261 0 0.00% 10261 0 0.00% 10261 0 0.00%
2529280 10,763 0.43% 2540953 11,673 0.46% 2551867 10,914 0.43% 2561769 9,902 0.39% 2570911 9,142 0.36%
584551 2,488 0.43% 587249 2,698 0.46% 589771 2,522 0.43% 592059 2,288 0.39% 594172 2,113 0.36%
1514192 6,444 0.43% 1521180 6,988 0.46% 1527714 6,534 0.43% 1533642 5,928 0.39% 1539115 5,473 0.36%
213517 908 0.43% 214503 986 0.46% 215424 921 0.43% 216260 836 0.39% 217032 772 0.36%
529715 1,322 0.25% 531057 1,342 0.25% 532395 1,338 0.25% 533719 1,324 0.25% 535039 1,320 0.25%
934851 2,333 0.25% 937219 2,368 0.25% 939581 2,362 0.25% 941917 2,336 0.25% 944247 2,330 0.25%
10732 26 0.24% 10760 28 0.26% 10787 27 0.25% 10814 27 0.25% 10840 26 0.24%
2022 Growth t%pa Growth 2023 Growth t%pa Growth 2024 Growth t%pa Growth 2025 Growth t%pa Growth 2026 Growth t%pa Growth
10261 21926 0.85% 10261 23879 0.92% 10261 22429 0.86% 10261 20437 0.78% 10261 18940 0.71%
2587079 5067 0.85% 2610958 5519 0.92% 2633387 5184 0.86% 2653824 4723 0.78% 2672764 4377 0.71%
597909 13126 0.85% 603428 14296 0.92% 608612 13427 0.86% 613335 12235 0.78% 617712 11339 0.71%
1548794 1851 0.85% 1563090 2016 0.92% 1576517 1893 0.86% 1588752 1725 0.78% 1600091 1599 0.71%
218397 2690 0.50% 220413 2735 0.51% 222306 2735 0.50% 224031 2713 0.50% 225630 2712 0.49%
540023 4747 0.50% 542758 4827 0.51% 545493 4827 0.50% 548206 4787 0.50% 550918 4787 0.49%
953042 54 0.50% 957869 56 0.51% 962696 55 0.50% 967483 55 0.50% 972270 55 0.50%
10941 54 0.50% 10997 56 0.51% 11052 55 0.50% 11107 55 0.50% 11162 55 0.50%
2018/19
change
(t)
Change
(%) 2019/20
change
(t)
Change
(%) 2020/21
change
(t)
Change
(%) 2021/22
change
(t)
Change
(%) 2022/23
change
(t)
Change
(%)
317313 ###### -4.97% 319691 2,378 0.75% 335,972 16,281 5.09% 340,466 4,494 1.34%
Waste Stream
AGR
C&I
CD
E
Haz
LACW Secondary
LACWHH
LACWNHH
Waste Stream
AGR
C&I
CD
E
Haz
LACW Secondary
LACWHH
LACWNHH
LACW
total household
waste
LACW Source AMR
22/23
WYCA Growth Rates - Maximum
Growth
WYCA Growth Rates - baseline
2027
Growth
tpa
%
Growth 2028
Growth
tpa
%
Growth 2029
Growth
tpa
%
Growth 2030
Growth
tpa
%
Growth 2031
Growth
tpa
%
Growth
10261 0 0.00% 10261 0 0.00% 10261 0 0.00% 10261 0 0.00% 10261 0 0.00%
2579667 8,756 0.34% 2588232 8,565 0.33% 2596430 8,198 0.32% 2604788 8,358 0.32% 2613224 8,436 0.32%
596196 2,024 0.34% 598176 1,980 0.33% 600070 1,894 0.32% 602002 1,932 0.32% 603952 1,950 0.32%
1544357 5,242 0.34% 1549484 5,127 0.33% 1554392 4,908 0.32% 1559396 5,004 0.32% 1564446 5,050 0.32%
217771 739 0.34% 218494 723 0.33% 219186 692 0.32% 219892 706 0.32% 220604 712 0.32%
536334 1,295 0.24% 537582 1,248 0.23% 538794 1,212 0.23% 539992 1,198 0.22% 541143 1,151 0.21%
946532 2,285 0.24% 948734 2,202 0.23% 950873 2,139 0.23% 952987 2,114 0.22% 955019 2,032 0.21%
10867 27 0.25% 10892 25 0.23% 10916 24 0.22% 10941 25 0.23% 10964 23 0.21%
2027 Growth t%pa Growth 2028 Growth t%pa Growth 2029 Growth t%pa Growth 2030 Growth t%pa Growth 2031 Growth t%pa Growth
10261 18208 0.68% 10261 17869 0.66% 10261 17158 0.63% 10261 17551 0.64% 10261 17772 0.65%
2690972 4208 0.68% 2708841 4130 0.66% 2725999 3965 0.63% 2743550 4057 0.64% 2761322 4107 0.65%
621920 10900 0.68% 626050 10697 0.66% 630015 10273 0.63% 634072 10506 0.64% 638179 10640 0.65%
1610991 1537 0.68% 1621688 1509 0.66% 1631961 1448 0.63% 1642467 1482 0.64% 1653107 1500 0.65%
227167 2667 0.48% 228676 2576 0.47% 230124 2507 0.45% 231606 2383 0.43% 233106 2392 0.43%
553585 4707 0.48% 556161 4545 0.47% 558668 4425 0.45% 561051 4205 0.43% 563443 4223 0.43%
976977 54 0.48% 981522 52 0.46% 985947 51 0.45% 990152 48 0.42% 994375 49 0.43%
11216 54 0.48% 11268 52 0.46% 11319 51 0.45% 11367 48 0.42% 11416 49 0.43%
2023/24
change
(t)
Change
(%)
average %
growth rate
329,365 11,101 3.26% 0.90%
0.37% Excluding 2020/21
Waste Stream
AGR
C&I
CD
E
Haz
LACW Secondary
LACWHH
LACWNHH
Waste Stream
AGR
C&I
CD
E
Haz
LACW Secondary
LACWHH
LACWNHH
LACW
total household
waste
LACW Source AMR
22/23
WYCA Growth Rates - Maximum
Growth
WYCA Growth Rates - baseline
2032
Growth
tpa
%
Growth 2033
Growth
tpa
%
Growth 2034
Growth
tpa
%
Growth 2035
Growth
tpa
%
Growth 2036
Growth
tpa
%
Growth
10261 0 0.00% 10261 0 0.00% 10261 0 0.00% 10261 0 0.00% 10261 0 0.00%
2621490 8,266 0.32% 2629540 8,050 0.31% 2637430 7,890 0.30% 2645200 7,770 0.29% 2645278 78 0.00%
605862 1,910 0.32% 607722 1,860 0.31% 609546 1,824 0.30% 611342 1,796 0.29% 611360 18 0.00%
1569395 4,949 0.32% 1574214 4,819 0.31% 1578937 4,723 0.30% 1583589 4,652 0.29% 1583635 46 0.00%
221302 698 0.32% 221981 679 0.31% 222647 666 0.30% 223303 656 0.29% 223310 7 0.00%
542248 1,105 0.20% 543308 1,060 0.20% 544321 1,013 0.19% 545333 1,012 0.19% 546343 1,010 0.19%
956970 1,951 0.20% 958840 1,870 0.20% 960629 1,789 0.19% 962414 1,785 0.19% 964197 1,783 0.19%
10986 22 0.20% 11008 22 0.20% 11028 20 0.18% 11049 21 0.19% 11069 20 0.18%
2032 Growth t%pa Growth 2033 Growth t%pa Growth 2034 Growth t%pa Growth 2035 Growth t%pa Growth 2036
Growth
tpa
%
Growth
10261 17468 0.63% 10261 17066 0.61% 10261 16778 0.60% 10261 16572 0.59% 10261 0 0.00%
2778790 4037 0.63% 2795856 3944 0.61% 2812634 3878 0.60% 2829206 3830 0.59% 2845889 16,683 0.59%
642216 10458 0.63% 646160 10217 0.61% 650038 10044 0.60% 653868 9921 0.59% 657723 3,855 0.59%
1663565 1475 0.63% 1673782 1440 0.61% 1683826 1417 0.60% 1693747 1399 0.59% 1703734 9,987 0.59%
234581 2302 0.41% 236021 2211 0.39% 237438 2119 0.37% 238837 2119 0.37% 240245 1,408 0.59%
565745 4062 0.41% 567956 3902 0.39% 570075 3740 0.37% 572194 3740 0.37% 574314 2,120 0.37%
998437 46 0.40% 1002339 45 0.39% 1006079 43 0.37% 1009819 43 0.37% 1013560 3,741 0.37%
11462 46 0.40% 11507 45 0.39% 11550 43 0.37% 11593 43 0.37% 11636 43 0.37%
Waste Stream
AGR
C&I
CD
E
Haz
LACW Secondary
LACWHH
LACWNHH
Waste Stream
AGR
C&I
CD
E
Haz
LACW Secondary
LACWHH
LACWNHH
LACW
total household
waste
LACW Source AMR
22/23
WYCA Growth Rates - Maximum
Growth
WYCA Growth Rates - baseline
Growth 2017 to 2036
Growth (t)
Total %
Growth
Av % Growth
0 0.00% 0.00%
156,149 6.27% 0.33%
36,088 6.27% 0.33%
93,480 6.27% 0.33%
13,182 6.27% 0.33%
23,591 4.51% 0.24%
41,635 4.51% 0.24%
478 4.51% 0.24%
Growth (t)
Total %
Growth
Av % Growth
0 0.00% 0.00%
340,162 13.58% 0.71%
78,616 13.58% 0.71%
203,643 13.58% 0.71%
28,716 13.58% 0.71%
48,378 9.20% 0.48%
85,378 9.20% 0.48%
980 9.20% 0.48%
Forecast Arisings
Median Growth
Waste Stream Baseline % Growth 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028
2017 2018 Forecast
AGR 2,900 0.00% 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900
C&I 909,900 0.33% 912,903 915,915 918,938 921,970 925,013 928,065 931,128 934,201 937,284 940,377 943,480
CD 272,500 0.00% 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500
E 706,100 0.00% 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100
Haz 76,800 0.33% 77,053 77,308 77,563 77,819 78,076 78,333 78,592 78,851 79,111 79,372 79,634
LACW see 2023 0.37% 323,100 324,295 325,495 326,700 327,908 329,122
Total 2,310,999 2,315,515 2,320,047 2,324,595 2,329,157 2,333,736
Maximum Growth
Waste Stream Baseline % Growth 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028
2017 2018 Forecast
AGR 2,900 0.50% 2,915 2,929 2,944 2,958 2,973 2,988 3,003 3,018 3,033 3,048 3,064
C&I 909,900 0.50% 914,450 919,022 923,617 928,235 932,876 937,540 942,228 946,939 951,674 956,432 961,215
CD 272,500 0.33% 273,399 274,301 275,207 276,115 277,026 277,940 278,857 279,778 280,701 281,627 282,557
E 706,100 0.33% 708,430 710,768 713,113 715,467 717,828 720,197 722,573 724,958 727,350 729,750 732,159
Haz 76,800 0.50% 77,184 77,570 77,958 78,348 78,739 79,133 79,529 79,926 80,326 80,728 81,131
LACW see 2023 0.40% 323,100 324,392 325,690 326,993 328,301 329,614
Total 2,340,898 2,350,583 2,360,309 2,370,077 2,379,887 2,389,738
difference = 29,900 35,068 40,262 45,482 50,729 56,003
2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042
2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900
946,593 949,717 952,851 955,996 959,150 962,315 965,491 968,677 971,874 975,081 978,299 981,527 984,766 988,016
272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500
706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100
79,897 80,161 80,425 80,691 80,957 81,224 81,492 81,761 82,031 82,302 82,573 82,846 83,119 83,393
330,339 331,562 332,789 334,020 335,256 336,496 337,741 338,991 340,245 341,504 342,768 344,036 345,309 346,586
2,338,330 2,342,940 2,347,565 2,352,206 2,356,863 2,361,536 2,366,224 2,370,929 2,375,650 2,380,387 2,385,140 2,389,909 2,394,694 2,399,496
2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042
3,079 3,094 3,110 3,125 3,141 3,157 3,172 3,188 3,204 3,220 3,236 3,253 3,269 3,285
966,021 970,851 975,705 980,584 985,486 990,414 995,366 1,000,343 1,005,344 1,010,371 1,015,423 1,020,500 1,025,603 1,030,731
283,489 284,425 285,363 286,305 287,250 288,198 289,149 290,103 291,060 292,021 292,984 293,951 294,921 295,894
734,575 736,999 739,431 741,871 744,319 746,775 749,240 751,712 754,193 756,682 759,179 761,684 764,198 766,720
81,537 81,945 82,354 82,766 83,180 83,596 84,014 84,434 84,856 85,280 85,707 86,135 86,566 86,999
330,932 332,256 333,585 334,919 336,259 337,604 338,955 340,310 341,672 343,038 344,410 345,788 347,171 348,560
2,399,632 2,409,569 2,419,548 2,429,570 2,439,635 2,449,743 2,459,895 2,470,090 2,480,329 2,490,612 2,500,940 2,511,311 2,521,727 2,532,188
61,303 66,629 71,983 77,364 82,772 88,208 93,671 99,161 104,679 110,226 115,800 121,403 127,033 132,693
Waste Stream Med Growth Max Growth
AGR 2,900 3,285
C&I 988,016 1,030,731
CD 272,500 295,894
E 706,100 766,720
Haz 83,393 86,999
LACW 346,586 348,560
2,900
988,016
272,500
706,100
83,393
346,586
3,285
1,030,731
295,894
766,720
86,999
348,560
A G R C & I C D E H A Z L A C W
PROJECTED WASTE ARISINGS BY
2042 UNDER TWO SCENARIOS
Med Growth Max Growth
Future Management Profiles
Scenario 1 - Recycling target led
Management Profile at end of Plan Period (2042)
Other Recovery
Waste Stream Recycling (%)
Non haz
Energy from
Waste (%)
Beneficial
use (%) Landfill (%)
Haz Waste
Treatment
(%)
AGR 75% 24% 0% 1%
C&I 75% 24% 0% 1%
CD 95% 4% 0% 1%
E 5% 0% 95% 0% 95% 4% 1%
Haz 0% 0% 0% 5% 95% 0.05 0 0
LACW 65% 34% 0% 1%
Scenario 2 - residual waste target led
Management Profile at end of Plan Period (2042) (to achieve 287kg/head residual waste by 2042)
Other Recovery
Waste Stream Recycling (%)
Non haz
Energy from
Waste (%)
Beneficial
use (%) Landfill (%)
Haz Waste
Treatment
(%)
AGR 79% 20% 0% 1%
C&I 79% 20% 0% 1%
CD 95% 4% 0% 1%
E 5% 0% 95% 0% 95% 4% 1%
Haz 0% 0% 0% 5% 95% 0.05 0 0
LACW 79% 20% 0% 1%
Residual waste arisings - reducing to 287kg per person by 2042
Residual waste arisings - reducing to 287kg per person by 2042
If residual waste arising is 2021 is taken as 521,088
And population in 2021 is taken as 812,000
And population growth rate is 0.75%
Year
Population
% Pop
increase
total
residual
waste (t)
kg/person
2021
812,000 0.75 521,088 642
2022 818,090 0.75 511,177 625 HIC CDE
2023 824,226 0.75 501,088 608 Coincinerator
6,860 0
2024 830,407 0.75 490,819 591 MSW
incinerator
387,183 0
2025 836,635 0.75 480,367 574 efw
incinerator
0 0
2026 842,910 0.75 469,732 557 coincinerator
0 0
2027 849,232 0.75 458,909 540 combustion 0 0
2028 855,601 0.75 447,898 523 sub-total 394,043
2029 862,018 0.75 436,696 507 landfill
(nonhaz)
126,493 19,693
2030
868,483 0.75 425,301
490
landfill
(SNRHW
cell)
552 557
2031 874,997 0.75 413,710 473 subtotal 127,045 20,250
2032 881,560 0.75 401,921 456 Total 521,088 20,250
2033 888,171 0.75 389,933 439
2034 894,832 0.75 377,742 422
2035 901,544 0.75 365,346 405
2036 908,305 0.75 352,743 388
2037 915,118 0.75 339,930 371
2038 921,981 0.75 326,905 355
2039 928,896 0.75 313,666 338
2040 935,863 0.75 300,210 321
2041 942,882 0.75 286,534 304
2042 949,953 0.75 272,637 287
355
Residual waste requiring management at 2042 = 272,637 21
17
Non haz Residual Waste
Arising (WDI 2021)
Other Recovery
For 287kg/hd residual waste
Waste
Stream
Waste arising
(max growth)
Recycling
(%) Recycling (t)
Non haz
Energy from
Waste (%)
Non haz
Energy from
Waste (t)
Beneficial
use (%)
Beneficial
use (t)
Non Haz
Landfill (%)
Non Haz
Landfill (t)
Haz waste
treatment
(%)
Haz waste
treatment t)
Haz waste
landfill (%)
Haz waste
landfill (t
Recycling 79% AGR 3,285 79% 2,595 20% 657 0% 0 1% 33 0% 0 0% 0
EfW 20% C&I 1,030,731 79% 814,277 20% 206,146 0% 0 1% 10,307 0% 0 0% 0
Landfill 1% CD 295,894 95% 281,100 4% 11,836 0% 0 1% 2,959 0% 0 0% 0
E 766,720 5% 38,336 0% 0 95% 728,384 0% 0 0% 0 0%
Haz 86,999 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 0% 0 95% 82,649 5% 4,350
LACW 348,560 79% 275,362 20% 69,712 0% 0 1% 3,486 0% 0 0% 0
2,532,188 88% 11% 1% 16,785
Non-inert
non haz 1,382,576 79% 1,092,235 20% 272,708 0% 0 1% 13,826
CHECK 276,515 Haz landfill = 0
3,807
SCENARIO 1: Median Growth
Recycling Targets lead
Year Waste Type
Projected
Waste
Arisings
(Tonnes)
Recycling
Capacity
Requirement
(Tonnes)
Energy from
Waste Capacity
Requirement
(Tonnes)
Benefical Use
(Tonnes)
Landfill
Capacity
Requirement
(Tonnes)
Haz Landfill
Capacity
Requireme
nt (Tonnes)
Haz waste
treatment Recycling EfW
Non haz
Landfill Haz Landfill
Benefical
Use
2042 AGR 2,900 2,175 696 0 493 0 0 LACW+C&I CD Haz LACW+C&I CD Haz
2042 C&I 988,016 741,012 237,124 0 163,615 0 0 966,293 258,875 0 354,963 10,900 0 267,647 69,049 670,795
2042 CD 272,500 258,875 10,900 0 46,325 0 0 365,863
2042 E 706,100 35,305 0 670,795 0 0 0
2042 Haz 83,393 0 0 0 0 4,170 79,224
2042 LACW 346,586 225,281 117,839 0 57,214 0
2,399,496 1,262,648 366,559 670,795 267,647 4,170
Note: Projected Waste Arisings are calculated as: Baseline Waste Arisings * (1 + Growth Rate)^(Year - Base Year)
Management Requirements (e.g., Recycling) are calculated as: Projected Waste Arisings * Management Profile (%).
Landfill requirements
N.B. Assumes landfilling at rate anticpated at the end of the plan period over the life of the plan period
WDI 2023 Non Haz LF
Non Haz
(SNRHW) cell
Haz merchant
LF Inert LF
Total haz
waste
landfilled
Non haz
waste
landfilled
HIC waste received at Landfill = 37,396 82,606 0 0 120,002
Inert/C&D waste received at landfill = 111,503 55,573 76,340 20,981
Haz waste received at landfill = 4,980 1,481 5,581 0 12,042
Totals = 153,879 139,660 81,921 20,981
Totals
Waste Type Waste Type 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 Non-haz Haz
AGR Arisings 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900 2,900
LF 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 29 493 0
C&I Arisings 937,284 940,377 943,480 946,593 949,717 952,851 955,996 959,150 962,315 965,491 968,677 971,874 975,081 978,299 981,527 984,766 988,016
LF 9,373 9,404 9,435 9,466 9,497 9,529 9,560 9,592 9,623 9,655 9,687 9,719 9,751 9,783 9,815 9,848 9,880 163,615 0
CD Arisings 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500 272,500
LF 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 2,725 46,325 0
E Arisings 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100 706,100
LF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Haz Arisings 79,111 79,372 79,634 79,897 80,161 80,425 80,691 80,957 81,224 81,492 81,761 82,031 82,302 82,573 82,846 83,119 83,393
LF 3,956 3,969 3,982 3,995 4,008 4,021 4,035 4,048 4,061 4,075 4,088 4,102 4,115 4,129 4,142 4,156 4,170 0 69,049
LACW Arisings 326,700 327,908 329,122 330,339 331,562 332,789 334,020 335,256 336,496 337,741 338,991 340,245 341,504 342,768 344,036 345,309 346,586
LF 3,267 3,279 3,291 3,303 3,316 3,328 3,340 3,353 3,365 3,377 3,390 3,402 3,415 3,428 3,440 3,453 3,466 57,214 0
267,647 69,049
Non-haz 15,394 15,437 15,480 15,523 15,567 15,610 15,654 15,698 15,742 15,786 15,831 15,875 15,920 15,965 16,010 16,055 16,100 251,547
Haz 3,956 3,969 3,982 3,995 4,008 4,021 4,035 4,048 4,061 4,075 4,088 4,102 4,115 4,129 4,142 4,156 4,170 64,880
Totals (linear reduction): Non-haz 120,002 114,534 109,065 103,597 98,128 92,660 87,191 81,723 76,254 70,786 65,317 59,849 54,380 48,912 43,443 37,975 32,506 27,038 21,569 16,101 1,001,324
Haz 12,042 11,628 11,213 10,799 10,385 9,971 9,556 9,142 8,728 8,313 7,899 7,485 7,070 6,656 6,242 5,828 5,413 4,999 4,585 4,170 112,271
BUoL 670,795 670,795 670,795 670,795 670,795 670,795 670,795 670,795 670,795 670,795 670,795 670,795 670,795 670,795 670,795 670,795 670,795 11,403,515
Non haz landfil capacity required over the plan period = 1,001,324
Haz landfil capacityrequired over the plan period = 112,271
Beneficial Use on Land 11,403,515
Actual Non haz landfill at 2023 (WDI) = 120,002 Haz landfill at 2023 (WDI) = 12,042
Non haz Landfill by 2042 if targets met = 16,100 Non haz Landfill by 2042 if targets met = 4,170
Difference = 103,902 Difference = 7,872
No. of years = 19 No. of years = 19
Linear reduction per year = 5468.5 Linear reduction per year = 414.3
SCENARIO 2 Maximum Growth
Residual Waste Target Lead
Year Waste Type
Projected
Waste
Arisings
(Tonnes)
Recycling
Capacity
Requirement
(Tonnes)
Energy from
Waste Capacity
Requirement
(Tonnes)
Benefical Use
(Tonnes)
Landfill
Capacity
Requirement
(Tonnes)
Haz Landfill
Capacity
Requireme
nt (Tonnes)
Haz waste
treatment Recycling EfW
Non haz
Landfill Haz Landfill
Benefical
Use
2042 AGR 3,285 2,595 657 0 493 0 0 LACW+C&I CD Haz LACW+C&I CD Haz
2042 C&I 1,030,731 814,277 206,146 0 168,421 0 0 1,089,640 281,100 0 275,858 11,836 0 275,361 71,078 728,384
2042 CD 295,894 281,100 11,836 0 49,000 0 0 287,694
2042 E 766,720 38,336 0 728,384 0 0 0
Haz 86,999 0 0 0 0 4,350 82,649
LACW 348,560 275,362 69,712 0 3,486 0 0
2,532,188 1,411,671 288,351 728,384 221,399 4,350
Note: Projected Waste Arisings are calculated as: Baseline Waste Arisings * (1 + Growth Rate)^(Year - Base Year)
Management Requirements (e.g., Recycling) are calculated as: Projected Waste Arisings * Management Profile (%).
Landfill requirements
Totals
Waste Type Waste Type 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027 2028 2029 2030 2031 2032 2033 2034 2035 2036 2037 2038 2039 2040 2041 2042 Non-haz Haz
Benefical
Use on Land
AGR Arisings 3,033 3,048 3,064 3,079 3,094 3,110 3,125 3,141 3,157 3,172 3,188 3,204 3,220 3,236 3,253 3,269 3,285
LF 30 30 31 31 31 31 31 31 32 32 32 32 32 32 33 33 33 537 0
C&I Arisings 951,674 956,432 961,215 966,021 970,851 975,705 980,584 985,486 990,414 995,366 1,000,343 1,005,344 1,010,371 1,015,423 1,020,500 1,025,603 1,030,731
LF 9,517 9,564 9,612 9,660 9,709 9,757 9,806 9,855 9,904 9,954 10,003 10,053 10,104 10,154 10,205 10,256 10,307 168,421 0
CD Arisings 280,701 281,627 282,557 283,489 284,425 285,363 286,305 287,250 288,198 289,149 290,103 291,060 292,021 292,984 293,951 294,921 295,894
LF 2,807 2,816 2,826 2,835 2,844 2,854 2,863 2,872 2,882 2,891 2,901 2,911 2,920 2,930 2,940 2,949 2,959 49,000 0
E Arisings 727,350 729,750 732,159 734,575 736,999 739,431 741,871 744,319 746,775 749,240 751,712 754,193 756,682 759,179 761,684 764,198 766,720
LF 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Haz Arisings 80,326 80,728 81,131 81,537 81,945 82,354 82,766 83,180 83,596 84,014 84,434 84,856 85,280 85,707 86,135 86,566 86,999
LF 4,016 4,036 4,057 4,077 4,097 4,118 4,138 4,159 4,180 4,201 4,222 4,243 4,264 4,285 4,307 4,328 4,350 0 71,078
LACW Arisings 326,993 328,301 329,614 330,932 332,256 333,585 334,919 336,259 337,604 338,955 340,310 341,672 343,038 344,410 345,788 347,171 348,560
LF 3,270 3,283 3,296 3,309 3,323 3,336 3,349 3,363 3,376 3,390 3,403 3,417 3,430 3,444 3,458 3,472 3,486 57,404 0
275,361 71,078
Non-haz (2042) 16,785 0
Haz (2042) 4,350 0
Totals: Non-haz 120,002 114,570 109,137 103,705 98,272 92,840 87,407 81,975 76,542 71,110 65,677 60,245 54,812 49,380 43,947 38,515 33,082 27,650 22,217 16,785 1,024,157
Haz 12,042 11,637 11,232 10,828 10,423 10,018 9,613 9,208 8,804 8,399 7,994 7,589 7,184 6,780 6,375 5,970 5,565 5,160 4,756 4,351 129,016
Benefical use on land 728,384 728,384 728,384 728,384 728,384 728,384 728,384 728,384 728,384 728,384 728,384 728,384 728,384 728,384 728,384 728,384 728,384 12,382,520
Non haz landfil capacity required over the plan period = 1,024,157
Haz landfil capacity required over the plan period = 129,016
Beneficial Use on Land required over the plan period = 12,382,520
Actual Non haz landfill at 2023 (WDI) = 120,002 Haz landfill at 2023 (WDI) = 12,042
Non haz Landfill by 2042 if targets met = 16,785 Non haz Landfill by 2042 if targets met = 4,350
Difference = 103,217 Difference = 7,692
No. of years = 19 No. of years = 19
Linear reduction per year = 5432.5 Linear reduction per year = 404.8
Existing waste management capacity
C’posting
Haz waste
treat’t
(Tpa) (Tpa)
Agricultural N/A 0 N/A N/A N/A N/A 0 0
Commercial
and Industrial
(C&I)
1,238,805 40,000 434,100 0 0 0 0 0
Construction
and
Demolition
(C&D)
427,929 0 110,513 0 0 0 0 0
Excavation 0 0 0 398,818 501,086 0 0 0
Hazardous 103 0 0 0 0 0 21,559 30,150
LACW 1,040,931 14,339 200,000 0 0 0 0 0
Total 2,707,768 54,339 744,613 899,904 0 0 21,559 30,150 4,458,333
Haz waste
TFS (Tpa)
Waste
Stream
Recycling
(Tpa)
EFW (Tpa)
Beneficial
Use
(Tonnes)
Non Haz
Landfill (T)
Haz Landfill
(T)
Ball Park Waste Management Capacity Gaps/Surplus
Key
Surplus
Gap
Median Growth
Recycling Targets lead
Haz waste
treatment
Composting
(Tpa) (Tpa)
Agricultural N/A N/A N/A see below see below 0 0 0
Commercial and
Industrial (C&I)
497,793 196,976 0 see below see below 0 0 40,000
Construction and
Demolition (C&D)
169,054 99,613 0 see below see below 0 0 0
Excavation -35,305 0 -10,503,611 see below see below 0 0 0
Hazardous 103 0 0 see below see below 21,559 -49,074 0
LACW 815,650 82,161 0 see below see below 0 0 14,339
Total 1,447,295 378,750 -10,503,611 -1,001,324 -112,271 21,559 -49,074 54,339
Total waste management requirements = 2,399,496
Total existing waste management capacity = 4,458,333
Capacity Gap/Surplus = 2,058,837
Maximum Growth
Residual Waste Target lead
Haz waste
treatment
Composting
(Tpa) (Tpa)
Agricultural N/A N/A N/A see below see below 0 0 0
Commercial and
Industrial (C&I)
424,528 227,954 0 see below see below 0 0 40,000
Construction and
Demolition (C&D)
146,829 98,677 0 see below see below 0 0 0
Excavation -38,336 0 -11,482,616 see below see below 0 0 0
Hazardous 103 0 0 see below see below 21,559 -52,499 0
LACW 765,569 130,288 0 see below see below 0 0 14,339
Total 1,298,693 456,919 -11,482,616 -1,024,157 -129,016 21,559 -52,499 54,339
Total waste management requirements = 0
Total existing waste management capacity = 0
Capacity Gap/Surplus = 0
Haz waste
TFS (Tpa)
Waste Stream
Recycling
(Tpa)
EFW (Tpa)
Beneficial
Use
(Tonnes)
Non Haz
Landfill
(T)
Haz Landfill
(T)
Haz Landfill
(T)
Haz waste
TFS (Tpa)
Waste Stream
Recycling
(Tpa)
EFW (Tpa)
Beneficial
Use
(Tonnes)
Non Haz
Landfill
(T)
Haz waste
treatment
Composti
ng
(Tpa) (Tpa)
Agricultural[
1]
N/A N/A N/A see total beloswee total below 0 0 0
C&I 498,000 197,000 0 see total beloswee total below 0 0 40,000
C&D 169,000 100,000 0 see total beloswee total below 0 0 0
Excavatio
n
-35,300 0 -10,500,000 see total beloswee total below 0 0 0
Hazardous 103 0 0 see total beloswee total below 21,559 -49,000 0
LACW 815,600 82,200 0 see total beloswee total below 0 0 14,300
Total 1,447,403 379,200 -10,500,000 -1,001,324 -112,271 21,559 -48,813 54,300
Haz waste
treatment
Composti
ng
(Tpa) (Tpa)
Agricultural[
1]
N/A N/A N/A see total beloswee total below 0 0 0
C&I 424,500 228,000 0 see total beloswee total below 0 0 40,000
C&D 147,000 98,600 0 see total beloswee total below 0 0 0
Excavatio
n
-38,300 0 -11,483,000 see total beloswee total below 0 0 0
Hazardous 100 0 0 see total beloswee total below 21,600 -52,500 0
LACW 766,700 130,600 0 see total beloswee total below 0 0 14,300
Total 1,300,000 457,200 -11,483,000 -955,965 -109,927 21,600 -52,500 54,300
[1] Agricultural waste management capacity gaps have not been separately identified as it is assumed the small quantities arising for
management off site would be managed at sites managing C&I and C&D waste.
Haz
Landfill
(T)
Haz waste
TFS (Tpa)
Waste
Stream
Recycling
(Tpa)
EFW
(Tpa)
Beneficial
Deposit (T)
Non Haz
Landfill
(T)
Haz
Landfill
(T)
Haz waste
TFS (Tpa)
Waste
Stream
Recycling
(Tpa)
EFW
(Tpa)
Beneficial
Deposit (T)
Non Haz
Landfill
(T)
[1] Agricultural waste management capacity gaps have not been separately identified as it is assumed the small quantities arising for
management off site would be managed at sites managing C&I and C&D waste.
Year Region ONS code Jpp Order Authority
Authority
type
Residual
household waste
per household
(kg/household)
(Ex NI191)
Percentage of
household waste
sent for reuse,
recycling or
composting (Ex
NI192)
Percentage of
municipal waste
sent to landfill (Ex
NI193)
Collected
household waste
per person (kg) (Ex
BVPI 84a)
2023-24 Yorkshire andE H0u8m00b0e0r35 91 Leeds City CounciUl MnitBaCry 530.5 35.3% 0.1% 366.1
Total local
authority
collected
waste
(tonnes)
Household -
total waste
(tonnes)
Household -
waste sent
for recyclingcompostingreuse
(tonnes)
Household
dry recyclingreuse
(tonnes)
Household
green recyclingreuse
(tonnes)
Household -
waste not
sent for
recycling
(tonnes)
Household - regular
collection (not
recycled) (tonnes)
Household - civic
amenity sites (not
recycled) (tonnes)
Household - other
sources (not recycled)
(tonnes)
Household -
estimated rejects
(tonnes) - See
"Notes" sheet for
detail on rejects
calculation.
Nonhousehold
-
total waste
(tonnes)
Nonhousehold
-
waste sent
for recyclingcompostingreuse
(tonnes)
Nonhousehold
-
waste not
sent for
recycling
(tonnes)
Nonhousehold
-
estimated
rejects
(tonnes)
Local
authority
collected
waste - sent
for recyclingcompostingreuse
(tonnes)
Local
authority
collected
waste - not
sent for
recycling
(tonnes)
Local
authority
collected -
estimated
rejects
(tonnes)
329,365 306,657 108,331 61,520 46,811 198,326 155,831 17,182 15,239 10,074 22,708 11,239 11,469 - 119,570 209,795 10,074
2013/14 2014/15 change (t) Change (%) 2015/16 change (t) Change (%) 2016/17 change (t) Change (%) 2017/18 change (t) Change (%) 2018/19 change (t) Change (%) 2019/20 change (t)
total
household
waste 305,359 305,618 259 0.08% 309,163 3,545 1.16% 314,931 5,768 1.87% 306,024 -8,907 -2.83%
LACW
Source AMR
22/23 325,572 323,965 -1,607 -0.49% 331,043 7,078 2.18% 338,630 7,587 2.29% 333,895 -4,735 -1.40% 317313 -16,582 -4.97% 319691 2,378
2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24
LACW
Source AMR
22/23 tonnes 323,965 331,043 338,630 333,895 317313 319691 335,972 340,466 329,365
2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24
Percentage growth -0.49 2.18 2.29 -1.4 -4.97 0.75 5.09 1.34 3.26
2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2020/21 2021/22 2022/23 2023/24
Percentage growth -0.49 2.18 2.29 -1.4 -4.97 0.75 1.34 3.26
2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18 2018/19 2019/20 2021/22 2023/24
-0.49 2.18 2.29 -1.4 -4.97 0.75 1.34 3.26
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
Chart Title
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
Chart Title
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
Chart Title
Change (%) 2020/21 change (t) Change (%) 2021/22 change (t) Change (%) 2022/23 change (t) Change (%) 2023/24 change (t) Change (%) average % growth rate
0.75% 335,972 16,281 5.09% 340,466 4,494 1.34% 329,365 11,101 3.26% 0.90%
0.37%
Discover more
Statement of Representation
Providing details about the purpose of the consultation, how to view the material, how to submit comments, accessibility and privacy notice.
Archived 2025 Consultation Material
This is for information only
Further information
Explains the work already undertaken on the Plan and the new plan-making process
Leeds Local Plan Issues & Options Consultation Report
Summary of the Leeds Local Plan Issues & Options Consultation Summer 2025
Leeds Local Plan Scoping Consultation Document
We would like your views on which general topic areas the Leeds Local Plan should cover and how you would like to be consulted as the plan is developed.
Stay Informed
Follow our projects to get notified of upcoming engagements and the latest project related news.